Re: [PATCH 0/1] x2apic implementation for kvm

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Monday 25 May 2009 17:07:33 Avi Kivity wrote:
> Sheng Yang wrote:
> > OK, you are totally talking about PV. For PV, I think let host kernel
> > accept the modification is more important here. (And for PV, using
> > hypercall seems more directly).
>
> Microsoft already defined their interfaces, and they use MSRs (but a
> different range from x2apic).

I think that means the PV interface for lapic. And yes, we can support it 
follow MS's interface, but x2apic still seems another story as you noted... I 
still don't think support x2apic here would bring us more benefits.

-- 
regards
Yang, Sheng
--
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

[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux