Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932122AbXINWkj (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Sep 2007 18:40:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757590AbXINWkc (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Sep 2007 18:40:32 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:52566 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757031AbXINWkb convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Sep 2007 18:40:31 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.20,257,1186383600"; d="scan'208";a="307249833" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Subject: RE: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:40:29 -0700 Message-ID: <97D612E30E1F88419025B06CB4CF1BE10379EBF9@scsmsx412.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <46EB0657.40603@codemonkey.ws> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure Thread-Index: Acf3G82DqlLKz2UnQxi+hI0c6pvbRQAAEUog References: <11897991353793-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com><46EAF4C6.8090903@goop.org> <46EAF6FC.80207@codemonkey.ws><46EAFBA0.4020503@goop.org> <46EB0136.6080105@codemonkey.ws><46EB02BA.6030909@goop.org> <46EB0657.40603@codemonkey.ws> From: "Nakajima, Jun" To: "Anthony Liguori" , "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" Cc: , , "Avi Kivity" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Sep 2007 22:40:30.0353 (UTC) FILETIME=[40EB6010:01C7F720] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1238 Lines: 41 Anthony Liguori wrote: > Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > Anthony Liguori wrote: > > > > > Yeah, see, the initial goal was to make it possible to use the KVM > > > paravirtualizations on other hypervisors. However, I don't think this > > > is really going to be possible in general so maybe it's better to just > > > use leaf 0. I'll let others chime in before sending a new patch. > > > > > > > Hm. Obviously you can just define a signature for "kvm-compatible > > hypercall interface" and make it common that way, but it gets tricky if > > the hypervisor supports multiple hypercall interfaces, including the kvm > > one. Start the kvm leaves at 0x40001000 or something? > > > > Yeah, that works with me. To me this is the beginning of fragmentation. Why do we need different and VMM-specific Linux paravirtualization for hardware-assisted virtualization? That would not be good for Linux. > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori > > > J Jun --- Intel Open Source Technology Center - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/