On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 04:55:34PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 9:50 AM Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> >
> > PVH dom0 is functionally very similar to PVH domU except for the domain
> > builder and the added set of hypercalls available to it.
> >
> > The main concern with declari
On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 9:50 AM Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>
> PVH dom0 is functionally very similar to PVH domU except for the domain
> builder and the added set of hypercalls available to it.
>
> The main concern with declaring it "Supported" is the lack of some features
> when compared to classic P
PVH dom0 is functionally very similar to PVH domU except for the domain
builder and the added set of hypercalls available to it.
The main concern with declaring it "Supported" is the lack of some features
when compared to classic PV dom0, hence switch it's status to supported with
caveats. List t
