linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [GIT PULL] Xen for 2.6.30 #2

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: <20090403173623.GB6295@elte.hu>
Date:	Fri, 3 Apr 2009 19:36:23 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc:	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [GIT PULL] Xen for 2.6.30 #2


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

>> You know our stance which is very simple: dont put in Xen-only 
>> hooks that slow down native, and get rid of the existing Xen-only 
>> hooks.
>
> Yes, I understand that.  Unlike the pvops stuff, the dom0 changes 
> are largely all init-time and setup, and so have no performance 
> impact.

Yes, but once dom0 goes in your incentive to fix the native kernel 
performance drain we accumulated along the years of paravirt layers 
will be strongly weakened, right? :)

	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/