On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 11:52:30AM +0800, Zhang, Xiantao wrote: > Dong, Eddie wrote: > > > > In X86, there are another enhancement (dynamic patching) base on > > pv_ops. The purpose is to improve cpu predication by converting > > indriect function call to direct function call for both C & ASM code. > > We may take similar approach some time later too. > > > > We really need advices from community before we jump into > coding. > > CC some active members that I though may be interested in pv_ops > > since KVM-IA64 mailinglist doesn;t exist yet. > > Hi, Eddie > > we just created the kvm-ia64-devel mailing list, and cc to the guys from > this list who maybe interested in this topic. > If you or other guys who are interested in kvm-ia64-devel or pv_virt_ops > for ia64, please subscribe it here Can we please keep the discussion about changes to arch/ia64 core functionality on this list and not move it elsewhere. This list is low enough volume and the contributors to the discussion will be consistent enough that most non-interested people will ignore things. The other changes related to virtualization specific to ia64 are fine in that forum, but if you are changing ivt.S, entry.S, etc, IMHO, those should be discussed here. Also, could you repost the patches? On a different note, I am willingly and woefully unaware of what the paravirt _NEEDS_ are. Could those be summarised as well? I will admit to being completely ignorant about how paravirt works on x86. Please don't state them in terms of we want to change the code this way, but rather in terms of we need to intercept these points in the kernel for this reason/purpose. Thanks, Robin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|