Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 19:36:23 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
       Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
       Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [GIT PULL] Xen for 2.6.30 #2
Message-ID: <20090403173623.GB6295@elte.hu>
References: <49D1209A.9000800@goop.org> <49D25A42.7060300@goop.org> <20090331185541.GA17807@elte.hu> <49D2713D.6090401@goop.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <49D2713D.6090401@goop.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 771
Lines: 21


* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:

>> You know our stance which is very simple: dont put in Xen-only 
>> hooks that slow down native, and get rid of the existing Xen-only 
>> hooks.
>
> Yes, I understand that.  Unlike the pvops stuff, the dom0 changes 
> are largely all init-time and setup, and so have no performance 
> impact.

Yes, but once dom0 goes in your incentive to fix the native kernel 
performance drain we accumulated along the years of paravirt layers 
will be strongly weakened, right? :)

	Ingo
--
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/