On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 01:12:37PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 17.04.13 at 12:16, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > If the hypervisor says it's Hyper-V, that's because it wants > > guests to use Hyper-V. I don't see why is guest second-guessing > > this a good idea. > > There are two reasons here: For one, when the hypervisor is not > Hyper-V, but is providing some Hyper-V emulation, that's intended > for Windows guests to use, not e.g. Linux ones, Fact is that this patch changed the guest/hypervisor interface which should not be done lightly. We don't know all uses that Linux is put to. I gave what seems, to me, like a perfectly valid reason to use hyper-v emulation with Linux guests, which you snipped out :) Below is a scanario that will now be broken: >>>It seems that one might want to use hyper-v emulation e.g. to test >>>hyper-v code without using windows, so the functionality >>>that this patch disables is not completely useless, There could be others. > such guests could use the native hypervisor interface with much > greater benefit. Why not disable the emulation in the hypervisor? What overriding the hypervisor will lead to, is hypervisors will try harder and mask their real identity. No one will win in this arms race. > And second, there reportedly are features of (newer?) Hyper-V > that some emulation may not provide, but that are also not easily > detectable. > > Jan Could you be more explicit please? What are these features? How does a windows guest able to use them if they are both new and not detectable? Why not just fix the emulation? How will Linux use the new features when e.g. Xen adds them? -- MST _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
