Messages in this thread | | | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Date | Sat, 20 Jun 2009 01:21:47 -0700 | Subject | Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC |
| |
Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com> writes:
> On 20/06/2009 00:44, "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com> wrote: > >>> I assume that putting AML into Xen has been considered, but I don't >>> anything about those deliberations. Keir? Jun? >>> >> >> Yes, it was one of the options years ago. We did not do that because Linux and >> Solaris (as dom0) already had the AML interpreter and it's overkill and >> redundant to have such a large component in the Xen hypervisor. Since the >> hypervisor does most of the power management (i.e. P, C, S-state, etc.) >> getting the info from dom0 today, we might want to reconsider the option. > > Yes, we could reconsider. However is there any stuff that dom0 remains > responsible for (e.g., PCI management, and therefore PCI hotplug) where it > would continue to need to be OSPM, interpreting certain AML objects? In > general how safe would it be to have two layered entities both playing at > being OSPM?
Short of running the oddball acpi based drivers. I'm not familiar with any acpi in the pci management.
Eric
| |