[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b74a3f83-cd8a-34a3-b436-95141f01cb20@suse.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Oct 2020 10:10:11 +0200
From:   Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
To:     Jason Andryuk <jandryuk@...il.com>
Cc:     Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] xen: Remove Xen PVH/PVHVM dependency on PCI
On 14.10.2020 19:53, Jason Andryuk wrote:
> @@ -76,7 +80,9 @@ config XEN_DEBUG_FS
>  	  Enabling this option may incur a significant performance overhead.
>  
>  config XEN_PVH
> -	bool "Support for running as a Xen PVH guest"
> +	bool "Xen PVH guest support"
Tangential question: Is "guest" here still appropriate, i.e.
isn't this option also controlling whether the kernel can be
used in a PVH Dom0?
>  	def_bool n
And is this default still appropriate?
Jan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
