Re: [patch 13/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: Consistently wrap paravirt ops callsites to make them patchable

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

 



> Possibly not, but I'd like to be able to say with confidence that
> running a PARAVIRT kernel on bare hardware has no performance loss
> compared to running a !PARAVIRT kernel.  There's the case of small
> instruction sequences which have been replaced with calls (such as
> sti/cli/push;popf/etc), 

My guess is that most critical pushf/popf are in spin_lock_irqsave(). It would 
be possible to special case that one -- inline it -- and use out of line
versions for all the others.

-Andi
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization


[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