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-ia64-devel

RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] cpu ops

To: "Isaku Yamahata" <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] cpu ops
From: "Dong, Eddie" <eddie.dong@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 10:20:52 +0800
Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 19:21:26 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20080408015755.GC27760%yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Discussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <10EA09EFD8728347A513008B6B0DA77A03000048@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080408015755.GC27760%yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AciZHbIpmoAHdZLdQmqDxYXIvAYssAAAPGgg
Thread-topic: [Xen-ia64-devel] cpu ops
Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 05:25:54PM +0800, Dong, Eddie wrote:
>> In current approach, we have cpu ops like
>> eoi/set_tpr/get_tpr,/set_itm /set_kr0/set_kr2.../set_kr7 etc.
>> I think there is another simple alternative is to simply export
>> setreg/getreg for cpu ops.
>> 
>> The benefit of this could be:
>>      1: Simple in pv_ops I/F
>>      2: hypervisor neutral. Today we only virtualize around 15 AR/CR
>>      read/write, But future it may extends since different Hypervisor
>> may do in different way.
> 
> Sounds reasonable.

I have a patch ready for this based on my previous removed
"paravirt_xxx"/"ia64_native_xxx"
version, I can rebase.

> Although it would result in big switch, presumably we can eliminate

Yes, many switch case. May hurt performance before patching.

> runtime switch cost by specifically handling setreg/getreg which
> might complicate binay patch slightly.
Yes, but eventually the performance will come back after patching.
Eddie.

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel

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