Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964850AbWCWAME (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2006 19:12:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964893AbWCWALs (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2006 19:11:48 -0500 Received: from mx1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:6278 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964850AbWCWAL2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2006 19:11:28 -0500 From: Andi Kleen To: Zachary Amsden Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 1/24] i386 Vmi documentation II Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 00:37:58 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: virtualization@lists.osdl.org, Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Xen-devel , Andrew Morton , Dan Hecht , Dan Arai , Anne Holler , Pratap Subrahmanyam , Christopher Li , Joshua LeVasseur , Chris Wright , Rik Van Riel , Jyothy Reddy , Jack Lo , Kip Macy , Jan Beulich , Ky Srinivasan , Wim Coekaerts , Leendert van Doorn References: <200603131759.k2DHxeep005627@zach-dev.vmware.com> <200603222338.44919.ak@suse.de> <4421E3C4.2060808@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: <4421E3C4.2060808@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200603230038.00583.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1230 Lines: 36 On Thursday 23 March 2006 00:54, Zachary Amsden wrote: > Andi Kleen wrote: > > On Wednesday 22 March 2006 23:45, Zachary Amsden wrote: > > > > > >> I propose an entirely different approach - use segmentation. > >> > > > > That would require a lot of changes to save/restore the segmentation > > register at kernel entry/exit since there is no swapgs on i386. > > And will be likely slower there too and also even slow down the > > VMI-kernel-no-hypervisor. > > > > There are no changes required to the kernel entry / exit paths. With > save/restore segment support in the VMI, reserving one segment for the > hypervisor data area is easy. Ok that might work yes. > > Still might be the best option. > > > > How did that rumoured Xenolinux-over-VMI implementation solve that problem? > > > > !CONFIG_SMP -- as I believe I saw in the latest Xen patches sent out as > well? Ah, cheating. This means the rumoured benchmark numbers are dubious too I guess. -Andi - 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/