[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45D83947.8080505@qumranet.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 13:32:23 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
To: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
CC: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@....de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.osdl.org,
xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com, Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
Ian Pratt <ian.pratt@...source.com>,
Christian Limpach <Christian.Limpach@...cam.ac.uk>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [patch 14/21] Xen-paravirt: Add XEN config options and disable
unsupported config options.
Zachary Amsden wrote:
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> The XEN config option enables the Xen paravirt_ops interface, which is
>> installed when the kernel finds itself running under Xen. (By some
>> as-yet fully defined mechanism, implemented in a future patch.)
>>
>> Xen is no longer a sub-architecture, so the X86_XEN subarch config
>> option has gone.
>>
>> The disabled config options are:
>> - PREEMPT: Xen doesn't support it
>> - HZ: set to 100Hz for now, to cut down on VCPU context switch rate.
>> This will be adapted to use tickless later.
>> - kexec: not yet supported
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...source.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Ian Pratt <ian.pratt@...source.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Christian Limpach <Christian.Limpach@...cam.ac.uk>
>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
>>
>
> We do support different HZ values, although 100HZ is actually
> preferable for us, so I don't object to that.
Ditto for kvm.
> PREEMPT is supported by us, but not as tested as I would like, so I
> also don't object to dropping it for generic paravirt guests - Rusty -
> Avi any objections to dropping preempt in terms of lguest/KVM
> paravirtualization?
I don't have any objections myself, but Ingo (who has done the bulk of
the kvm paravirt work; cc'ed) uses PREEMPT_RT, so he will certainly object.
>
> Paravirt-ops definitely needs a hook for kexec, although we should not
> disable kexec for the natively booted paravirt-ops. Eric - is there a
> way to disable it at runtime?
kvm paravirt should work correctly with kexec.
>
> We do support the doublefault task gate, and it would be good to keep
> it, but I can't complain so much if it is gone from generic paravirt
> kernels for now, because it is non-essential, and generally fatal
> anyway. We do need it for native boots of paravirt-ops kernels,
> however, so turning off the config option still needs to be revisited.
kvm doesn't support task gates (a task switch will immediately kill the
guest).
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists