Hi Wei,
On 07/07/16 16:28, Wei Liu wrote:
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 09:07:59AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 07.07.16 at 16:55, <wei.l...@citrix.com> wrote:
Cc HV maintainers
I'm of course fine with moving this structure somewhere else.
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 06:15:37PM +0100, Anthony PERARD wrote:
diff --git a/xen/include/public/xen.h b/xen/include/public/xen.h
I suspect it would make more sense to move it to public/arch-x86/xen.h.
The question is whether we really mean this to remain x86 specific:
The way it's now there's nothing inherently x86-ish there. But if
that's the plan (which the conditional around it supports) then the
suggested alternative resting place seems appropriate to me.
For one, ARM doesn't distinguish PV vs HVM vs PVH (yet). Calling it HVM
for ARM would be wrong IMHO.
Correct, if you would have to do a comparison with x86 it would be PVH.
However, this structure looks useful only if we lack a way to describe
those parameters in the firmware. This is not the case for ARM as this
could be described easily by the device tree with the generic bindings.
Regards,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
