>>> On 13.11.17 at 16:41, <george.dun...@citrix.com> wrote: > +### x86/Nested PV > + > + Status, x86 HVM: Tech Preview > + > +This means running a Xen hypervisor inside an HVM domain, > +with support for PV L2 guests only > +(i.e., hardware virtualization extensions not provided > +to the guest). > + > +This works, but has performance limitations > +because the L1 dom0 can only access emulated L1 devices.
So is this explicitly meaning Xen-on-Xen? Xen-on-KVM, for example, could be considered "nested PV", too. IOW I think it needs to be spelled out whether this means the host side of things here, the guest one, or both. > +### x86/Nested HVM > + > + Status, x86 HVM: Experimental > + > +This means running a Xen hypervisor inside an HVM domain, > +with support for running both PV and HVM L2 guests > +(i.e., hardware virtualization extensions provided > +to the guest). "Nested HVM" generally means more than using Xen as the L1 hypervisor. If this is really to mean just L1 Xen, I think the title should already say so, not just the description. > +### x86/Advanced Vector eXtension > + > + Status: Supported As indicated before, I think this either needs to be dropped or be extended by an entry for virtually every CPUID bit exposed to guests. Furthermore, in this isolated fashion it is not clear what derived features (e.g. FMA, FMA4, AVX2, or even AVX-512) it is meant to imply. If any of them are implied, "with caveats" would need to be added as long as the instruction emulator isn't capable of handling the instructions, yet. > +### x86/HVM EFI > + > + Status: Supported > + > +Booting a guest via guest EFI firmware Shouldn't this say OVMF, to avoid covering possible other implementations? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
