On Thu, 2016-02-04 at 20:33 +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > El 4/2/16 a les 19:22, Andrew Cooper ha escrit: > > On 04/02/16 17:48, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > I've Cced a bunch of people who have expressed interest in the > > > HVMlite > > > design/implementation, both from a Xen or OS point of view. If you > > > would like to be removed, please say so and I will remove you in > > > further iterations. The same applies if you want to be added to the > > > Cc. > > > > > > This is an initial draft on the HVMlite design and implementation. > > > I've > > > mixed certain aspects of the design with the implementation, because > > > I > > > think we are quite tied by the implementation possibilities in > > > certain > > > aspects, so not speaking about it would make the document incomplete. > > > I > > > might be wrong on that, so feel free to comment otherwise if you > > > would > > > prefer a different approach. At least this should get the > > > conversation > > > started into a couple of pending items regarding HVMlite. I don't > > > want > > > to spoil the fun, but IMHO they are: > > > > > > - Local APIC: should we _always_ provide a local APIC to HVMlite > > > guests? > > > > I think it would be best to offer an LAPIC by default (to be helpful to > > most modern OSes), but leave the option for an administrator to disable > > if they specifically don't want one. > > So this also implies that we will also provide ACPI by default (RSDT, > FADT, MADT)? IMHO the local APIC is specially helpful if it comes with a > MADT, so that we can do CPU enumeration from it.
Just to be clear, we aren't talking about _requiring_ all (SMP) PVH guests to be ACPI aware are we? Just about providing some of this stuff in ACPI format for the benefit of OSes which happen to already be ACPI aware. Right? _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel