Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC v1 00/13] Introduce HMV without dm and new boot ABI

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 11:55 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> I don't know if we should introduce a new name for this, but I wanted to
> point out that this is different from PVH from Xen point of view. In
> particular most of the outstanding PVH work items (32bit, AMD) on the
> hypervisor would be redudant if we get this to work, right? If that is
> the case, then I think it is best we agree on which road we want to take
> going forward as soon as possible to avoid duplicated or wasted efforts.

I think what you are saying is we either want to pursue this path _or_
PVH, but not both, and I would be inclined to agree, it seems to me like
duplication of both effort and functionality to do both.

Ian.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel