[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090517123324.2e57bc55@infradead.org>
Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 12:33:24 -0700
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To: david@...g.hm
Cc: devzero@....de, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?
On Sun, 17 May 2009 12:25:38 -0700 (PDT)
david@...g.hm wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2009, devzero@....de wrote:
> > maybe this is iust a stupid comment (please forgive, i?m no
> > advanced kernel hacker), but can?t the code inserted by the patches
> > and which changes the fastpath just #IFDEF`ed at the critical
> > offsets ? (as building a dom0 kernel is just another build target,
> > isn`t it ?)
>
> no, if dom0 is going to be widely deployed, it will be because the
> distros turn on dom0 support by default. as a result any penalties
> due to xen support will be felt by all users of those distros (even
> if they don't use xen)
>
at minimum we need to split CONFIG_PARAVIRT up into
"want to be nice to hypervisors" and "I want to be Xen Dom0";
they look to largely not overlap.... so lets not make the costs overlap
either.
--
Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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