Zachary Amsden wrote:
Why are we rushing so much to do 64-bit paravirt that we are breaking working configurations? If the developement is going to be this chaotic, it should be done and tested out of tree until it can stabilize.
x86.git is out of the mainline tree, and it seems to be working fairly smoothly. I've come to appreciate the "lots of small patches with quick turnaround" model that Ingo has been pushing.
I do not like having to continuously retest and review the x86 branch because the paravirt-ops are constantly in flux and the 32-bit code keeps breaking.
Most of the activity is pure unification, with paravirt being part of that. It doesn't help that it increases the CONFIG_ combinatorial explosion, but "make randconfig" shakes things out fairly quickly.
We won't be doing 64-bit paravirt-ops for exactly this reason - is there a serious justification from the performance angle on modern 64-bit hardware? If not, why justify the complexity and hackery to Linux?
A big part of the rationale is to unify 32 and 64 bit, so that paravirt isn't a gratuitous difference between the two. Also, 32 and 64 bit Xen have almost identical interface requirements, so the work is making 64-bit Xen progress (and lguest64, of course).
J _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
