[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <4FEC9686020000780008C9BB@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 16:38:14 +0100
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To: "Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: <cyclonusj@...il.com>, <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"Suresh B Siddha" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
<marmarek@...isiblethingslab.com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
<tglx@...utronix.de>, <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
<mingo@...hat.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Jason Garrett-Glaser" <jason@...4.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86 fixes for 3.3 impacting distros
(v1).
>>> On 28.06.12 at 16:42, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 06/28/2012 07:28 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> I also chatted with the core Xen hypervisor folks about adding in the
> context switch code
>> to alter the PAT layout - but they were not keen a about it - and I am not
> sure how much
>> CPU cycles one loses by doing a wrmsr to the PAT register on every guest
> context switch
>> (worst case when on has a pvops kernel and a old-style one - where the WC bit
> would differ)?
>>
>
> And you're comparing that to a bunch of new pvops calls? The discussion
> shouldn't even have started until you had ruled out this solution and
> had data to show it.
That's definitely not an option: Xen itself may be (and is, under
certain circumstances at least) using WC page table entries, so
we can't allow on-the-fly changes to the meaning of the various
indexes.
Jan
--
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