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: [patch 13/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: Consistently wrap paravi

To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [patch 13/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: Consistently wrap paravirt ops callsites to make them patchable
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>
Date: 20 Mar 2007 00:42:48 +0100
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 00:42:48 +0100
Cc: zach@xxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, chrisw@xxxxxxxxxxxx, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, anthony@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, mingo@xxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 16:42:00 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <45FEE010.1050103@xxxxxxxx>
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: <20070316.023331.59468179.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <45FB005D.9060809@xxxxxxxx> <1174127638.8897.75.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070318.003309.71088169.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070318120814.GA45869@xxxxxx> <1174272469.11680.23.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <m1648xxf93.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <45FEE010.1050103@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
> Possibly not, but I'd like to be able to say with confidence that
> running a PARAVIRT kernel on bare hardware has no performance loss
> compared to running a !PARAVIRT kernel.  There's the case of small
> instruction sequences which have been replaced with calls (such as
> sti/cli/push;popf/etc), 

My guess is that most critical pushf/popf are in spin_lock_irqsave(). It would 
be possible to special case that one -- inline it -- and use out of line
versions for all the others.

-Andi

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

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