This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 13/13] Nested Virtualiztion: hap-on-hap

At 06:53 +0100 on 13 Sep (1284360838), Dong, Eddie wrote:
> Tim Deegan wrote:
> > At 02:37 +0100 on 10 Sep (1284086227), Dong, Eddie wrote:
> >> wording is always a challenge in nested virtualization :(
> >> 
> >> I have similar feeling and thinking. In all the explaination text, we
> >> use the term l1 guest, l2 guest which makes everybody easy to
> >> understand, but in the code we are avoiding those clear prefix both
> >> here and in Qing's patch. How about we use l1/l2 prefix more to
> >> explicitly differentiate among them? Just 2 cents, it may be too
> >> later.
> > 
> > That sounds like a good idea.  My only reservation is that it might be
> > confusing since we already use l1 and l2 when naming levels of
> > pagetables, so e.g. the shadow code has variables called l2gfn.
> > 
> > Maybe we could use n0, n1, n2 for nesting levels instead?
> > 
> Or l1g, l2g? Anyway, either is better to me and up to your decision. 

I think I prefer n1, n2 - just because it's shorter. :)


Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Principal Software Engineer, XenServer Engineering
Citrix Systems UK Ltd.  (Company #02937203, SL9 0BG)

Xen-devel mailing list