Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs justbecause there's no local APIC

[Keir Fraser]

On 20/06/2009 00:44, "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> I assume that putting AML into Xen has been considered, but I don't
>> anything about those deliberations.  Keir? Jun?
>> 
> 
> Yes, it was one of the options years ago. We did not do that because Linux and
> Solaris (as dom0) already had the AML interpreter and it's overkill and
> redundant to have such a large component in the Xen hypervisor. Since the
> hypervisor does most of the power management (i.e. P, C, S-state, etc.)
> getting the info from dom0 today, we might want to reconsider the option.

Yes, we could reconsider. However is there any stuff that dom0 remains
responsible for (e.g., PCI management, and therefore PCI hotplug) where it
would continue to need to be OSPM, interpreting certain AML objects? In
general how safe would it be to have two layered entities both playing at
being OSPM?

 -- Keir


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/