>>> On 16.01.17 at 18:26, wrote:
> On 16/01/17 17:07, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 16.01.17 at 12:40, wrote:
>>> Dom0 doesn't have a toolstack to explicitly decide that ITSC is safe to
>>> offer.
>>> For domains which are constructed with
On 16/01/17 17:07, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.01.17 at 12:40, wrote:
>> Dom0 doesn't have a toolstack to explicitly decide that ITSC is safe to
>> offer.
>> For domains which are constructed with disable_migrate set, offer ITSC
>> automatically.
> I'm afraid
>>> On 16.01.17 at 12:40, wrote:
> Dom0 doesn't have a toolstack to explicitly decide that ITSC is safe to offer.
> For domains which are constructed with disable_migrate set, offer ITSC
> automatically.
I'm afraid "constructed" is ambiguous here: To me, construction
Dom0 doesn't have a toolstack to explicitly decide that ITSC is safe to offer.
For domains which are constructed with disable_migrate set, offer ITSC
automatically.
This is important for HVM-based dom0, and for when cpuid faulting is imposed
on the control domain.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper