proposed interface change for setting the ldt

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Zachary Amsden wrote:
> The paravirt-op just got a lot harder to implement, so there is a cost 
> to the simpler interface.

I don't see why it is a "lot" harder.  It might take 5 lines of code 
rather than jumping straight into the ROM, but it doesn't seem like huge 
complexity.

> I just think it's really weird to have LDT not described in the GDT, 
> but LDT is weird anyways.

It gets excluded as part of a broader test which also prevents any 
table, but specifically the LDT, from referring to an LDT (on the 
grounds that its hard to reason about, and may be undefined).

    J


[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux