Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 21:36:52 -0500 From: Mason Loring Bliss <mason@blisses.org> To: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Subject: Re: XEN vs XENHVM? Message-ID: <20131214023652.GY19296@blisses.org> In-Reply-To: <52ABC23E.4020408@freebsd.org> References: <20131214022355.GX19296@blisses.org> <52ABC23E.4020408@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 06:28:14PM -0800, Colin Percival wrote: > The XEN option is for *paravirtualized* Xen -- aka. the original version, > before Intel and AMD added virtualization support into their CPUs. HVM uses > "hardware virtualization", but we also use PV drivers where available. Oh, hm. So, there was never any reason for me to be running XEN (vs XENHVM) on this hardware in the first place! Heh. I'll switch over my existing system and try GENERIC on a new box I'm spinning up this weekend. Thank you. -- The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which. - G. Orwell
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20131214023652.GY19296>