[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5aaeb0ec-fd16-ab28-3892-3c6a18165a30@linux.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 01:58:51 +0300
From: Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/apic: Introduce paravirq irq_domain
On 17.08.2016 17:36, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2016-08-15 14:37, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 15/08/2016 13:51, Alexander Popov wrote:
>>> It seems to me that the idea of an irq_domain for interrupts injected
>>> by a hypervisor is quite generic.
>>
>> True, but all of Xen, KVM and VMware use PCI devices for this.
>
> So does Jailhouse. We have to have the code anyway because we need to
> keep Linux alive after taking over control. Thus it is actually easier
> to reuse the same logic for para-virtualized domains (non-root cells).
Hello, Jan! Yes, I see.
I can only say that Xen, KVM, VMware and Jailhouse happily use hypercalls,
which are a valid interface between a hypervisor and its guests.
Positive Technologies hypervisor called Gvandra (named after a big Caucasus
mountain) tries to use only the hypercalls and avoid PCI device emulation
to become slimmer.
Best regards,
Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists