Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756688AbXI2Akn (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Sep 2007 20:40:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755406AbXI2Akf (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Sep 2007 20:40:35 -0400 Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:37748 "EHLO mail.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755362AbXI2Akf (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Sep 2007 20:40:35 -0400 Message-ID: <46FD9EFE.5040004@goop.org> Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:40:30 -0700 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (X11/20070727) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Nakajima, Jun" CC: Andi Kleen , Zachary Amsden , Rusty Russell , Avi Kivity , Glauber de Oliveira Costa , Anthony Liguori , Virtualization Mailing List , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Alan Cox Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] paravirt_ops: refactor struct paravirt_ops into smaller pv_*_ops References: <46FD4388.6000106@goop.org> <97D612E30E1F88419025B06CB4CF1BE10396C957@scsmsx412.amr.corp.intel.com> <46FD8FE1.4090507@goop.org> <97D612E30E1F88419025B06CB4CF1BE1039B6D3E@scsmsx412.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <97D612E30E1F88419025B06CB4CF1BE1039B6D3E@scsmsx412.amr.corp.intel.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1151 Lines: 29 Nakajima, Jun wrote: > Yes. For the native, "safe_halt" is "sti; hlt". The "native_halt" is > just "hlt". So the para_virt part of "hlt" could be moved to pv_cpu_ops, > and the "sti" part stays in pv_irq_ops. > By "sti part", you mean the full "sti; hlt" sequence of safe_halt, right? Since it needs to be an atomic sequence to avoid race conditions, so the native sequence has to be precisely "sti; hlt" to take advantage of the sti shadow, and other pv-backends will need their own way to guarantee this atomicity. But I'm quite happy to put plain "hlt" into cpu_ops as halt_cpu() or something (and perhaps rename safe_halt to something a bit more descriptive). > Actually my concern was that such misc ops might grow to include the > things don't fit well anywhere else. To me, then pv_lazy_ops (with just > .set_mode) might be better. > The lazy interface has needed a rethink anyway. J - 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/