Zachary Amsden <zach at vmware.com> writes: > > We do support different HZ values, although 100HZ is actually preferable for us, > so I don't object to that. PREEMPT is supported by us, but not as tested as I > would like, so I also don't object to dropping it for generic paravirt guests - > Rusty - Avi any objections to dropping preempt in terms of lguest/KVM > paravirtualization? > > Paravirt-ops definitely needs a hook for kexec, although we should not disable > kexec for the natively booted paravirt-ops. Eric - is there a way to disable it > at runtime? > > We do support the doublefault task gate, and it would be good to keep it, but I > can't complain so much if it is gone from generic paravirt kernels for now, > because it is non-essential, and generally fatal anyway. We do need it for > native boots of paravirt-ops kernels, however, so turning off the config option > still needs to be revisited Have machine_kexec_prepare fail. I think your machine description or paravirt_ops or whatever it is needs to hook both machine_kexec_prepare and machine_kexec. I know there actually has been some work to get kexec actually working under Xen but I don't know where that has gone. Eric
