On Dec 5, 2014 8:09 AM, "Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 08:29:54AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > > > > On 05/12/2014 03:24, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > We could do a simple thing - which is that the paravirt_enabled > > > could have the value 1 for Xen and 2 for KVM. The assembler logic > > > would be inverted and just check for 1. I am not going to attempt > > > to write the assembler code :-) > > > > Wouldn't Xen HVM also want to be 2? > > Oddly enough it was never set! > > Looking at where the paravit_enabled() macro is used, on KVM it could > be just set to zero. I noticed that KVM is setting paravirt_enabled = 1 twice, once the main kvm guest code and once in kvmclock. Will the EBDA code in head.c care? That would also increase sanity a little IMO. We currently have "paravirt" meaning that the normal HW architecture isn't present (Den, lguest) and "paravirt" meaning that there are extra optional-to-use hypervisor features (KVM, etc). --Andy -- 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
