[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AED54D1.6070706@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 11:28:49 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>
CC: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
kurt.hackel@...cle.com, Glauber Costa <glommer@...hat.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@...citrix.com>, zach.brown@...cle.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, chris.mason@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/pvclock: add vsyscall implementation
On 10/29/2009 06:15 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> On a related note, though some topic drift, many of
> the problems that occur in virtualization due to migration
> could be better addressed if Linux had an architected
> interface to allow it to be signaled if a migration
> occurred, and if Linux could signal applications of
> the same. I don't have any cycles (pun intended) to
> think about this right now, but if anyone else starts
> looking at it, I'd love to be cc'ed.
>
IMO that's not a good direction. The hypervisor should not depend on
the guest for migration (the guest may be broken, or malicious, or being
debugged, or slow). So the notification must be asynchronous, which
means that it will only be delivered to applications after migration has
completed.
Instead of a "migration has occured, run for the hills" signal we're
better of finding out why applications want to know about this event and
addressing specific needs.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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