On 26 February 2014 22:35, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 26 Feb 2014 18:35, "Christoffer Dall" <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: >> Serial console: The platform should provide a console, >> based on an emulated pl011, a virtio-console, or a Xen PV console. > > For portable disk image, can Xen PV be dropped from the list? pl011 is part > of SBSA, and virtio is getting standardised, but Xen PV is implementation > specific. The underlying question here is to what extent we want to force VMs to provide a single implementation of something and to what extent we want to force guests to cope with "any choice from some small set". Personally I don't think it's realistic to ask the Xen folk to drop their long-standing PV bus implementation, and so the right answer is roughly what we have here, ie "guest kernels need to cope with both situations". Otherwise Xen is going to go its own way anyway, and you just end up either (a) ruling out Xen as a platform for running portable disk images or (b) having an unofficial requirement to handle Xen PV anyway if you want an actually portable image, which I would assume distros do. thanks -- PMM -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
