[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AB67BB0.3020303@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 22:00:00 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
CC: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
"virtualization@...ts.osdl.org" <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Paravirtualization on VMware's Platform [VMI].
On 09/20/2009 06:49 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> kvm will be removing the pvmmu support soon; and Xen is talking about
>> running paravirtualized guests in a vmx/svm container where they don't
>> need most of the hooks.
>>
>>
> We have no plans to drop support for non-vmx/svm capable processors, let
> alone require ept/npt.
>
Today, certainly; similarly kvm will host-side pvmmu support for a while
to support live migration from older hosts.
But in a few years it may make sense to run everything in a vmx/svm
container even for Xen; we can then drop x86 pv_ops for good.
--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists