WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC V5 00/11] Paravirtualized ticketlocks

To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC V5 00/11] Paravirtualized ticketlocks
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:37:19 -0700
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxxxx>, KVM <kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jason Baron <jbaron@xxxxxxxxxx>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Xen Devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:39:07 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4E986B2B.60803@xxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <cover.1318466916.git.jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <1318503245.24856.12.camel@twins> <4E971580.6030300@xxxxxxxx> <20111014141701.GA2433@xxxxxxxxxx> <4E986B2B.60803@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110927 Thunderbird/7.0
On 10/14/2011 10:02 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> 
> Jump labels are essentially binary: you can use path A or path B.  pvops
> are multiway: there's no limit to the number of potential number of
> paravirtualized hypervisor implementations.  At the moment we have 4:
> native, Xen, KVM and lguest.
> 

This isn't (or shouldn't be) really true... it should be possible to do
an N-way jump label even if the current mechanism doesn't.

        -hpa


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel