> Was this change due to some backward compatibility reason?
I found the compatibility issue describe here:
http://xen.markmail.org/message/usjxnjyp3csm3uct?q=superpages+date:200907
So it seems even more important that I somehow claim
a field (or at least a bit) in struct xc_dom_image.
Any help to get this right would be appreciated
as getting it wrong clearly has some non-obvious
consequences.
Thanks,
Dan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Magenheimer 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 3:58 PM
> To: Xen-Devel (E-mail)
> Subject: vtsc in domain builder
>
>
> I'm working on passing vtsc=[0|1] (rdtsc emulation) from
> the vm.cfg file into xen.
>
> I was using the superpages vm.cfg implementation as a guide,
> but I see the domain builder interface for superpages changed
> in c/s 19963 to pass the value via a flag in a pad byte in
> struct xc_dom_image. Was this change due to some backward
> compatibility reason? This looks like a nicer interface,
> but is there another pad byte I can/should use? If not,
> what's the best way then to pass the vtsc value from the
> tools to Xen?
>
> Also, will I be able to use the same interface for both
> HVM and PV, or should I use the HVM param interface for
> HVM domains (using the HPET parameter as a model)?
>
> Thanks,
> Dan
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel