linux-kernel - Re: [benchmark] 1% performance overhead of paravirt

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <819818298.20090603001203@eikelenboom.it>
Date:	Wed, 3 Jun 2009 00:12:03 +0200
From:	Sander Eikelenboom <linux@...elenboom.it>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [benchmark] 1% performance overhead of paravirt_ops on nativekernels

The argument that the 1% perfomance hit for native kernels requires extra work for
package maintainers because they have to make a seperate package for native
(without the performance hit) and a xen version (with paravirt_ops) seems
bogus.

At the moment they also have to provide the 2 packages, 1 native recent
kernel, and 1 older back or forward ported xen kernel (2.6.18 or 2.6.26 for
debian)

So this probably wouldn't change much, although it would be nice for
paravirt_ops to perform like native, i think it shouldn't have to be a show
stopper for inclusion of Xen in mainline.

--
        Sander

--
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/