MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20151116210314.GA10307@char.us.oracle.com>
References: <CALCETrVAEKrPiMX9O43pqkEC=xqc2qJ=VBNsV5iMMvW09W07hQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <56468D24.8030801@oracle.com> <CALCETrWD+=vj_rL-4Ng8fj_oOEs8Q6wftFg9hDDm1HiiEmu2FA@mail.gmail.com>
 <564A0371.2040104@oracle.com> <CALCETrUc+dbVY4JRUOqTCZpXndz7OJkchMU7nfc8QNyjgRxY2w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20151116195906.GB20137@pd.tnic> <CALCETrW3vehf-BRatCYL8TS-xF8MPDeEYtUEwfuayGrt_FO0vg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20151116202232.GC20137@pd.tnic> <564A4125.8000603@oracle.com>
 <CALCETrWhCxYaZmo0p8xfs0d482+SkY36-ZExbkN6W43Ui8tNZg@mail.gmail.com> <20151116210314.GA10307@char.us.oracle.com>
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 13:04:28 -0800
Message-ID: <CALCETrXExPZyAtkc8pR1qr0ugweRGuuPOPw=_wju5V0=wswPmg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/x86: Adjust stack pointer in xen_sysexit
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc: Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@oracle.com>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
        David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2048
Lines: 56

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
<konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:50:19PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Boris Ostrovsky
>> <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> wrote:
>> > On 11/16/2015 03:22 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:11:11PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Are there really multiple feature bits for this stuff?  I'd like to
>> >>> imagine that the entry code is all either Xen PV or native/PVH/PVHVM
>> >>> -- i.e. I assumed that PVH works like native for all entries.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Almost. For PVH we will have a small stub to set up bootparams and such but
>> > then we jump to startup_{32|64} code.
>> >
>> >
>> >> I just reacted to Boris' statement:
>> >>
>> >> "We don't currently have a Xen-specific CPU feature. We could, in
>> >> principle, add it but we can't replace all of current paravirt patching
>> >> with a single feature since PVH guests use a subset of existing pv ops
>> >> (and in the future it may become even more fine-grained)."
>> >
>> >
>> > Actually, nevermind this --- I was thinking about APIC ops and they are not
>> > pv ops.
>> >
>> > Note though that there are other users of pv ops --- lguest and looks like
>> > KVM (for one op) use them too.
>> >
>>
>> Honestly, I think we should just delete lguest some time soon.  And
>> KVM uses this stuff so lightly that we shouldn't need all of the pvop
>> stuff.  (In fact, I'm slowly working on removing KVM_GUEST's
>> dependency on PARAVIRT.)
>
> Even for the pvclock?
>
> (sorry for stealing this thread on this subject).

I don't think that pvclock uses any of the paravirt infrastructure.
It's just another clock source AFAIK.

--Andy

-- 
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/