linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] xen: core dom0 support

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]

Date:	Sat, 28 Feb 2009 09:36:21 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen: core dom0 support


* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> Hm, how can the same code that you call "massive out-of-tree patches 
>> which doesn't make anyone happy" in an out of tree context suddenly 
>> become non-intrusive "minor amount of extra stuff" in an upstream 
>> context?
>>
>> I wish the upstream kernel was able to do such magic, but i'm afraid it 
>> is not.
>
> No, but I am ;) The current out of tree Xen patches are very 
> intrusive because there hasn't been much incentive to reduce 
> their impact.  I've going through it all and very carefully 
> rewriting it 1) be cleaner, 2) enable/disable itself at 
> runtime, 3) have clean interfaces and interactions with the 
> rest of the kernel, and 4) address any concerns that others 
> have.  In other words, make Xen a first-class kernel citizen.
>
> Most of the intrusive stuff has already been merged (and 
> merged for some time now), but without dom0 support its only 
> half done; as it stands people are using mainline Linux for 
> their domUs, but are still limited to patched up (old) kernels 
> for dom0.  This is a real problem because all the drivers for 
> interesting new devices are in the new kernels, so there's an 
> additional burden of backporting device support into old 
> kernels.

This means that the "massive out-of-tree patches which doesn't 
make anyone happy" argument above is really ... a hiperbole and 
should be replaced with: "small, unintrusive out-of-tree patch"?

	Ingo
--
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/