On 12/13/2010 09:03 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>
> The interface is a lot simpler. The guest decides what to patch and
> where to jump. A "please patch me" flag needs a ton of documentation on
> what patch means and what the constraints on the guest environment are.
>
The constraints need to be documented, but I think "a ton" is a bit of
an exaggeration
I guess. It's correct for x86 (which has four processor modes, and you
need to consider segmentation, etc.), perhaps not so much for powerpc.
-- and having the guest do the patching itself means
that the structure of the shared page must become stable ABI.
It has to be a stable ABI in any case so you can live migrate. Unless
you want the hypervisor to unpatch or something.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html