linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Use para_fill instead of vmi_get

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <45E38B01.2010509@goop.org>
Date:	Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:36:01 -0800
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
CC:	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Use para_fill instead of vmi_get_function for APIC ops

Zachary Amsden wrote:
> Patch looks good, thanks.   But the whole para_fill / vmi_get_function
> stuff could probably be done even cleaner.  It was just a helper at
> first to work around the awkward syntax, and it is still a bit ugly,
> but I haven't come up with a better solution yet, mostly because with
> the new inlining work Jeremy is doing, we might want to start doing
> selective inlining, in which case I'll have to go back over the code
> anyway to clean everything to get the logic right in all cases.

Yes, my patching updates make pretty much all the pv_ops patchable,
including the apic ones.  The simple thing is to fill out paravirt_ops
with the appropriate pointers, then set the .patch operation to
paravirt_default_patch, which will basically turn them all into direct
calls.  If you want to start inlining stuff, then you can do that too.

    J
-
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/