Hi,
I came to know from Xen-ARM wiki and other related pages that ARM port is based on
xen-unstable and it can boot a Linux 3.0 based virtual machine (dom 0). for reference
https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/11/29/265
As Xen-ARM can boot Linux 3.0, it means that this hypervisor is using
paravirt_ops infrastructure of kernel. I want to know that did you explicitly
add paravirt_ops support in kernel for ARM?
As far as I know paravirt_ops is an infrastructure given by Linux kernel to support
hypervisor. and http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps tells that
at present paravirt_ops is available for x86_32, x86_64 and ia64 architectures.
If this the case that you have add support of paravirt_ops in Linux kernel for ARM
architecture then what is the level of complexity for adding this kind of support?
Thanks
I came to know from Xen-ARM wiki and other related pages that ARM port is based on
xen-unstable and it can boot a Linux 3.0 based virtual machine (dom 0). for reference
https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/11/29/265
As Xen-ARM can boot Linux 3.0, it means that this hypervisor is using
paravirt_ops infrastructure of kernel. I want to know that did you explicitly
add paravirt_ops support in kernel for ARM?
As far as I know paravirt_ops is an infrastructure given by Linux kernel to support
hypervisor. and http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps tells that
at present paravirt_ops is available for x86_32, x86_64 and ia64 architectures.
If this the case that you have add support of paravirt_ops in Linux kernel for ARM
architecture then what is the level of complexity for adding this kind of support?
Thanks