At 19:12 + on 02 Jan (1420222343), Andrew Cooper wrote:
supervisor_mode_kernel was an x86_32-only feature which permitted a PV dom0 to
run in ring 0, but at the expense of not being able to start any domUs.
As the x86_32 Xen build has been removed from tree, removing the remaining
On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 16:07 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
What usecase was supervisor_mode_kernel developed for? It seems
counter-intuitive, but I can't find anything in the history explaining
its use.
It was a prototype from the pre-pvops days to see if it would be
feasible to have a
On Mon, 5 Jan 2015 15:35:27 +
Andrew Cooper andrew.coop...@citrix.com wrote:
On 05/01/15 15:16, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2015-01-02 at 19:12 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
supervisor_mode_kernel was an x86_32-only feature which permitted
a PV dom0 to run in ring 0, but at the expense
On Fri, 2015-01-02 at 19:12 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
supervisor_mode_kernel was an x86_32-only feature which permitted a PV dom0 to
run in ring 0, but at the expense of not being able to start any domUs.
As the x86_32 Xen build has been removed from tree, removing the remaining
On 05/01/15 15:16, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2015-01-02 at 19:12 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
supervisor_mode_kernel was an x86_32-only feature which permitted a PV dom0
to
run in ring 0, but at the expense of not being able to start any domUs.
As the x86_32 Xen build has been removed from
On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 15:35 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
Answering out-of-order
This patch has no functional change WRT PVH. The hunk commented on is
simply changed via indentation due to the removal of the conditional it
is in. It was never been possible for a PVH kernel boot with
On 05/01/15 15:41, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 15:35 +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
Answering out-of-order
This patch has no functional change WRT PVH. The hunk commented on is
simply changed via indentation due to the removal of the conditional it
is in. It was never been
