lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRE: Use CPUID to communicate with the hypervisor.
    On 9/26/2008 5:32:26 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
    > Alok Kataria wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > This is great, obviously... although we'll have to deal with
    > > > legacy methods for a while if not indefinitely (just as we have to
    > > > for pre-CPUID processors).
    > >
    > > Ok, do you think we should keep those (legacy) interfaces separate
    > > so that they can be phased out whenever the time is right.
    > >
    >
    > I don't, realistically, think we can phase them out for a very long
    > time, and then it's usually a "why bother". What we want to do is
    > abstract them so they don't make the rest of the code suck.
    >
    > >
    > > I would like to see this as a generic hypervisor way to get
    > > frequency rather than a VMware specific thingy.
    > > > In order for *that* to be safe, you'd have to have well-defined
    > > > ranges for different virtualization vendors where each of them can
    > > > define their own stuff.
    > >
    > > My motivation for doing this is to have a standard across all the
    > > hypervisor's. If all the different hypervisor guys can come to some
    > > sought of consensus on the various hypervisor leafs that would help
    > > keep this simple and a lot more maintainable.
    > >
    >
    > Agreed. However, that's obviously beyond our immediate control.

    Well, actually it's under full control of the Linux community because the _kernel_ defines such virtual or semi-hardware features. I'm not sure if that particular value (0x40000010) is proper, but we should be able to pick reasonable ones/ranges.
    >
    > -hpa
    .
    Jun Nakajima | Intel Open Source Technology Center
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-09-27 03:01    [W:0.259 / U:0.196 seconds]
    ©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site