[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200708091626.09316.ak@suse.de>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 16:26:09 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
rusty@...tcorp.com.au, mingo@...e.hu, chrisw@...s-sol.org,
avi@...ranet.com, anthony@...emonkey.ws,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, lguest@...abs.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 25/25] [PATCH] add paravirtualization support for x86_64
> This has to match the normal C calling convention though, doesn't it?
Native cli/sti/save/restore_flags are all only assembly and can be easily
(in fact more easily than in C) written as pure assembler functions. Then
you can use whatever calling convention you want.
While some paravirt implementations may have more complicated implementations
i guess it's still a reasonable requirement to make them simple enough
in pure assembler. If not they can use a trampoline, but that's hopefully
not needed.
-Andi
-
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