Re: [PATCH 25/25] [PATCH] add paravirtualization support for x86_64

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

 



Steven Rostedt wrote:
> --
> On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
>   
>>> This has to match the normal C calling convention though, doesn't it?
>>>       
>> Native cli/sti/save/restore_flags are all only assembly and can be easily
>> (in fact more easily than in C) written as pure assembler functions. Then
>> you can use whatever calling convention you want.
>>     
>
> I agree.
> Should we make a paravirt_ops_asm.S file that can implement these native
> funcions, and so we can get rid of the C functions only doing asm?
>
>   
>> While some paravirt implementations may have more complicated implementations
>> i guess it's still a reasonable requirement to make them simple enough
>> in pure assembler. If not they can use a trampoline, but that's hopefully
>> not needed.
>>     
>
> It works for lguest64.  I'm sure it should be no problem with other HVs.
>   

Hm, I can't say the idea thrills me.  Lets get the thing working first,
and then worry about having special per-pvop calling conventions.

    J
_______________________________________________
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