Christoph Egger
2011-Mar-09 14:22 UTC
[Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/12] Nested Virtualization: tools
-- ---to satisfy European Law for business letters: Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach b. Muenchen Geschaeftsfuehrer: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Dong, Eddie
2011-Mar-28 13:54 UTC
RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/12] Nested Virtualization: tools
Acked by Eddie.dong@intel.com -----Original Message----- From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Christoph Egger Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 10:22 PM To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com Subject: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/12] Nested Virtualization: tools -- ---to satisfy European Law for business letters: Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach b. Muenchen Geschaeftsfuehrer: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Ian Jackson
2011-Mar-31 18:24 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/12] Nested Virtualization: tools
Christoph Egger writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/12] Nested Virtualization: tools"):> tools: Add nestedhvm guest config optionI don''t have an objection to this. The tools parts seem largely sane. However, I have two queries. Firstly, one for Christoph: is this patch safe to apply before the relevant hypervisor features, or will it break ? If it will break then it should be applied later. Secondly, one for the Xen.org team in general: are we accepting new features in Xend ? If not then I should drop the changes to xend from this patch. Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Christoph Egger
2011-Apr-01 08:41 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/12] Nested Virtualization: tools
On 03/31/11 20:24, Ian Jackson wrote:> Christoph Egger writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/12] Nested Virtualization: tools"): >> tools: Add nestedhvm guest config option > > I don''t have an objection to this. The tools parts seem largely sane. > However, I have two queries. > > Firstly, one for Christoph: is this patch safe to apply before the > relevant hypervisor features, or will it break ? If it will break > then it should be applied later.It is safe. nested virtualization is disabled by default. You have to add "nestedhvm=1" to your guest config file to make the guest see hw virtualization available.> Secondly, one for the Xen.org team in general: are we accepting new > features in Xend ? If not then I should drop the changes to xend from > this patch. > > Ian. >-- ---to satisfy European Law for business letters: Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24, 85689 Dornach b. Muenchen Geschaeftsfuehrer: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Keir Fraser
2011-Apr-01 10:26 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/12] Nested Virtualization: tools
On 31/03/2011 19:24, "Ian Jackson" <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:> Christoph Egger writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/12] Nested Virtualization: > tools"): >> tools: Add nestedhvm guest config option > > I don''t have an objection to this. The tools parts seem largely sane. > However, I have two queries. > > Firstly, one for Christoph: is this patch safe to apply before the > relevant hypervisor features, or will it break ? If it will break > then it should be applied later. > > Secondly, one for the Xen.org team in general: are we accepting new > features in Xend ? If not then I should drop the changes to xend from > this patch.If we are dropping xend in this release cycle, why would we bother taking new features for it? In fact, why is xend even still in the tree? :-) -- Keir> Ian. > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Ian Jackson
2011-Apr-04 10:25 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/12] Nested Virtualization: tools
Keir Fraser writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/12] Nested Virtualization: tools"):> If we are dropping xend in this release cycle, why would we bother taking > new features for it? In fact, why is xend even still in the tree? :-)One reason we might like to keep it in the tree for now is that it will give us somewhere to try out bugfixes proposed for backporting to 4.1. Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel