On Fri, 2007-02-16 at 13:48 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote: > Christoph Lameter wrote: > > It still seems to be implemented for Xen and not to support a variety of > > page table methods in paravirt ops. > > Yes, but that is just because the Xen hooks happens to be near the last > part of the merge. VMI required some special hooks, as do both Xen and > lhype (I think ... Rusty can correct me if lhype's puppy's have > precluded the addition of new hooks). lguest was supposed to be a demonstration of paravirt_ops, so it shouldn't have added any. But note that I did change some other things, such as the esp0 initialization for the swapper. Puppies are still alive and well. Although Andi not pushing into 2.6.21 (yet?) made puppies sad 8( > Xen page table handling is very > different, mostly it is trap and emulate so writable page tables can > work, which means they don't always issue hypercalls for PTE updates, > although they do have that option, should the hypervisor MMU model > change, or performance concerns prompt a different model (or perhaps, > migration?) Yes, Xen really like their direct pagetable stuff. I'm a traditionalist, myself, but it did require some expansion of paravirt_ops. KVM might well want more, although from here it's more likely we'll move some of the hooks up the stack a little IMHO. Cheers, Rusty.
