Rusty Russell wrote:
> I originally installed paravirt_ops in asm, but realized it was just
> overly complex. As to assuming a cooperative hypervisor, err, yes.
>
Hypervisors expect cooperative guests; it doesn't necessarily go both ways.
> Err, if they want to boot Linux, they're going to have to figure out
> some system for booting. If they really can't use ours, then, yes,
> they're going to have to submit a patch with justification of why they
> have to do it differently.
>
Well, they're still going to have a much larger patch with everything
else in it, so its hardly going to be a big issue. But I expect anyone
wanting anything special will just arrange for their own entrypoint
regardless. The "common" entrypoint will be uncluttered, but perhaps
unused.
> I agree that it's a little ad-hoc, but setting a simple standard fits
> well with my ideal of making it easy for implementers, starting with you
> two. And we both know Xen doesn't care, so I find your protests lack
> oomph 8)
Well, I'm mostly interested in coming up with a good set of interfaces.
If Xen were my only concern, well, we have a mass of patches for that
interface already.
J
