[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] xen: introduce VCPUOP_register_runstate_phys_memory_area hypercall
- To: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Andrii Anisov <andrii.anisov@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 18:11:04 +0300
- Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "andrii_anisov@xxxxxxxx" <andrii_anisov@xxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 15:11:17 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 14.06.19 17:39, Julien Grall wrote:
Why? What are the benefits for a guest to use the two interface together?
I do not say the guest has to use both interfaces simultaneously. It is
logically odd, doing so will only reflect in increasing of hypervisor overhead.
But such an implementation will have a simpler code, which expected to be (a
bit) faster.
So the code simplicity would be a benefit for us. Lower hypervisor overhead is
a benefit for sane guests, which use only one interface.
BTW, dropping the old interface implementation will be much easier in future if
it will not clash with the new one.
After all they have exactly the same data...
Yes, but normal guests should use only one interface.
BTW, I'm a bit confused, are you OK with lock (not trylock) existing in
hypercall?
This is still in discussion.
I see. So I'll think about the continuation implementation in meanwhile.
--
Sincerely,
Andrii Anisov.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
