On 07/14/2015 01:01 AM, Sahita, Ravi wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
>> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 1:01 AM
>>
>>>>> On 10.07.15 at 23:48, <ravi.sah...@intel.com> wrote:
>>>> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 6:30 AM
>>>>
>>>>>>> On 01.07.15 at 20:09, <edmund.h.wh...@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  xen/arch/x86/hvm/Makefile        |  1 +
>>>>>  xen/arch/x86/hvm/altp2m.c        | 92
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't this better go into xen/arch/x86/mm/?
>>>
>>> In this case we followed the pattern of nestedhvm - hope that's ok.
>>
>> Not really imo: Nested HVM obviously belongs in hvm/; alt-P2m is more of a
>> mm extension than a HVM one afaict, and hence would rather belong in mm/.
>>
> 
> Would like George's opinion also on this before we make this change (again 
> want to avoid thrashing on things like this).

This is a bit of a murky one, since the whole reason you're doing this
is that you actually do use hardware to do the VMFUNC and p2m switching.

Let me take a look at v5 and see what I think (as it sounds like some of
the hvm_function hooks have disappeared).

 -George



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Reply via email to