linux-kernel - Re: Xen & VMI?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 06 Mar 2007 11:23:19 +0100
From:	Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...e.de>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...o.co.il>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	virtualization <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Xen & VMI?

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>> Oh, and btw:  What was the reason why kvm paravirtualization doesn't use
>> the vmi interface?
>>
>>   
> 
> There actually was proof of concept code to do just that (by Anthony
> Liguori).  For Linux, I feel paravirt_ops is superior as we can extend
> it if something is missing.

Thanks.  That is actually the point I want make: although it is
*possible* to do that via VMI ROM, doing that using paravirt_ops is
*better* (no matter whenever the hypervisor is xen or kvm).  Thats why
we actually have it.  The very same discussion a couple months ago came
to  exactly that conclusion.

cheers,
  Gerd

-- 
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...e.de>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/