WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC, PATCH 5/24] i386 Vmi code patching

To: Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC, PATCH 5/24] i386 Vmi code patching
From: Zachary Amsden <zach@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 14:16:08 -0800
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, Christopher Li <chrisl@xxxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Pratap Subrahmanyam <pratap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wim Coekaerts <wim.coekaerts@xxxxxxxxxx>, Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxx>, Joshua LeVasseur <jtl@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dan Hecht <dhecht@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, Jack Lo <jlo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx>, Anne Holler <anne@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jyothy Reddy <jreddy@xxxxxxxxxx>, Kip Macy <kmacy@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Ky Srinivasan <ksrinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx>, Leendert van Doorn <leendert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dan Arai <arai@xxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:53:22 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20060322214025.GJ15997@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <200603131802.k2DI2nv8005665@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200603222115.46926.ak@xxxxxxx> <20060322214025.GJ15997@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051201)
Chris Wright wrote:
* Andi Kleen (ak@xxxxxxx) wrote:
The disassembly stuff indeed doesn't look like something
that belongs in the kernel.

Agree that. It should be done prior to kernel booting, invisible to the kernel itself. I'm working on it, but there is still a lot to do.


Strongly agreed.  The strict ABI requirements put forth here are not
in-line with Linux, IMO.  I think source compatibility is the limit of
reasonable, and any ROM code be in-tree if something like this were to
be viable upstream.

Strongly disagree. Without an ABI, you don't have binary compatibility. Without binary compatibility, you have no way to inline any hypervisor code into the kernel. And this is key for performance. The ROM code is being phased out.

Is it the strictness of the ABI that is the problem? I don't like constraining the native register values any much either, but it was the expedient thing to do. The ABI can be relaxed quite a bit, but it has to be there.

The idea of in-tree ROM code doesn't make sense. The entire point of this layer of code is that it is modular, and specific to the hypervisor, not the kernel. Once you lift the shroud and combine the two layers, you have lost all of the benefit that it was supposed to provide.

Zach

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>