search for: x8664_ksyms_64

Hi, This series corresponds do older patches in the paravirt series that was neither already applied, nor I will touch again. In general, they do not touch code that can be unified (at least, without being the unification a big problem on its own). They passed through this list a lot of times, so I feel them ready for inclusion, unless someone opposes. As with the other patches, they apply to

Hi, This series corresponds do older patches in the paravirt series that was neither already applied, nor I will touch again. In general, they do not touch code that can be unified (at least, without being the unification a big problem on its own). They passed through this list a lot of times, so I feel them ready for inclusion, unless someone opposes. As with the other patches, they apply to

Hey folks, Here's a new spin of the pvops64 patch series. We didn't get that many comments from the last time, so it should be probably almost ready to get in. Heya! >From the last version, the most notable changes are: * consolidation of system.h, merging jeremy's comments about ordering concerns * consolidation of smp functions that goes through smp_ops. They're sharing

Hey folks, Here's a new spin of the pvops64 patch series. We didn't get that many comments from the last time, so it should be probably almost ready to get in. Heya! >From the last version, the most notable changes are: * consolidation of system.h, merging jeremy's comments about ordering concerns * consolidation of smp functions that goes through smp_ops. They're sharing

Hey folks, This is the part-of-pvops-implementation-that-is-not-exactly-a-merge. Neat, uh? This is the majority of the work. The first patch in the series does not really belong here. It was already sent to lkml separetedly before, but I'm including it again, for a very simple reason: Try to test the paravirt patches without it, and you'll fail miserably ;-) (and it was not yet

Hey folks, This is the part-of-pvops-implementation-that-is-not-exactly-a-merge. Neat, uh? This is the majority of the work. The first patch in the series does not really belong here. It was already sent to lkml separetedly before, but I'm including it again, for a very simple reason: Try to test the paravirt patches without it, and you'll fail miserably ;-) (and it was not yet

...| 1 + arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c | 11 +- arch/x86/kernel/kvmclock.c | 4 +- arch/x86/kernel/machine_kexec_64.c | 171 ++++-------- arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 260 +++++++++++------- arch/x86/kernel/traps.c | 9 + arch/x86/kernel/x8664_ksyms_64.c | 3 + arch/x86/kernel/x86_init.c | 4 - arch/x86/lguest/boot.c | 3 +- arch/x86/lib/getuser.S | 43 ++- arch/x86/mm/init.c | 459 +++++++++++++++++++++----------- arch/x86/mm/init_32.c | 106 +++++...

...| 1 + arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c | 11 +- arch/x86/kernel/kvmclock.c | 4 +- arch/x86/kernel/machine_kexec_64.c | 171 ++++-------- arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 260 +++++++++++------- arch/x86/kernel/traps.c | 9 + arch/x86/kernel/x8664_ksyms_64.c | 3 + arch/x86/kernel/x86_init.c | 4 - arch/x86/lguest/boot.c | 3 +- arch/x86/lib/getuser.S | 43 ++- arch/x86/mm/init.c | 459 +++++++++++++++++++++----------- arch/x86/mm/init_32.c | 106 +++++...

...| 1 + arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c | 11 +- arch/x86/kernel/kvmclock.c | 4 +- arch/x86/kernel/machine_kexec_64.c | 171 ++++-------- arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 260 +++++++++++------- arch/x86/kernel/traps.c | 9 + arch/x86/kernel/x8664_ksyms_64.c | 3 + arch/x86/kernel/x86_init.c | 4 - arch/x86/lguest/boot.c | 3 +- arch/x86/lib/getuser.S | 43 ++- arch/x86/mm/init.c | 459 +++++++++++++++++++++----------- arch/x86/mm/init_32.c | 106 +++++...