similar to: [PATCH 0/2] Remove 32-bit Xen PV guest support

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 3000 matches similar to: "[PATCH 0/2] Remove 32-bit Xen PV guest support"

2020 Aug 07
4
[PATCH v3 0/7] Remove 32-bit Xen PV guest support
The long term plan has been to replace Xen PV guests by PVH. The first victim of that plan are now 32-bit PV guests, as those are used only rather seldom these days. Xen on x86 requires 64-bit support and with Grub2 now supporting PVH officially since version 2.04 there is no need to keep 32-bit PV guest support alive in the Linux kernel. Additionally Meltdown mitigation is not available in the
2020 Jul 01
5
[PATCH v2 0/4] Remove 32-bit Xen PV guest support
The long term plan has been to replace Xen PV guests by PVH. The first victim of that plan are now 32-bit PV guests, as those are used only rather seldom these days. Xen on x86 requires 64-bit support and with Grub2 now supporting PVH officially since version 2.04 there is no need to keep 32-bit PV guest support alive in the Linux kernel. Additionally Meltdown mitigation is not available in the
2020 Jul 01
5
[PATCH v2 0/4] Remove 32-bit Xen PV guest support
The long term plan has been to replace Xen PV guests by PVH. The first victim of that plan are now 32-bit PV guests, as those are used only rather seldom these days. Xen on x86 requires 64-bit support and with Grub2 now supporting PVH officially since version 2.04 there is no need to keep 32-bit PV guest support alive in the Linux kernel. Additionally Meltdown mitigation is not available in the
2020 Aug 15
6
[PATCH v4 0/6] x86/paravirt: cleanup after 32-bit PV removal
A lot of cleanup after removal of 32-bit Xen PV guest support in paravirt code. Changes in V4: - dropped patches 1-3, as already committed - addressed comments to V3 - added new patches 5+6 Changes in V3: - addressed comments to V2 - split patch 1 into 2 patches - new patches 3 and 7 Changes in V2: - rebase to 5.8 kernel - addressed comments to V1 - new patches 3 and 4 Juergen Gross (6):
2017 May 19
13
[PATCH 00/10] paravirt: make amount of paravirtualization configurable
Today paravirtualization is a all-or-nothing game: either a kernel is compiled with no paravirtualization support at all, or it is supporting paravirtualized environments like Xen pv-guests or lguest additionally to some paravirtualized tuning for KVM, Hyperv, VMWare or Xen HVM-guests. As support of pv-guests requires quite intrusive pv-hooks (e.g. all access functions to page table entries,
2017 May 19
13
[PATCH 00/10] paravirt: make amount of paravirtualization configurable
Today paravirtualization is a all-or-nothing game: either a kernel is compiled with no paravirtualization support at all, or it is supporting paravirtualized environments like Xen pv-guests or lguest additionally to some paravirtualized tuning for KVM, Hyperv, VMWare or Xen HVM-guests. As support of pv-guests requires quite intrusive pv-hooks (e.g. all access functions to page table entries,
2018 Aug 13
11
[PATCH v2 00/11] x86/paravirt: several cleanups
This series removes some no longer needed stuff from paravirt infrastructure and puts large quantities of paravirt ops under a new config option PARAVIRT_XXL which is selected by XEN_PV only. A pvops kernel without XEN_PV being configured is about 2.5% smaller with this series applied. tip commit 5800dc5c19f34e6e03b5adab1282535cb102fafd ("x86/paravirt: Fix spectre-v2 mitigations for
2018 Aug 10
13
[PATCH 00/10] x86/paravirt: several cleanups
This series removes some no longer needed stuff from paravirt infrastructure and puts large quantities of paravirt ops under a new config option PARAVIRT_XXL which is selected by XEN_PV only. A pvops kernel without XEN_PV being configured is about 2.5% smaller with this series applied. tip commit 5800dc5c19f34e6e03b5adab1282535cb102fafd ("x86/paravirt: Fix spectre-v2 mitigations for
2020 Aug 09
2
[PATCH v3 4/7] x86/paravirt: remove 32-bit support from PARAVIRT_XXL
On 8/7/20 4:38 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: > @@ -377,10 +373,7 @@ static inline pte_t __pte(pteval_t val) > { > pteval_t ret; > > - if (sizeof(pteval_t) > sizeof(long)) > - ret = PVOP_CALLEE2(pteval_t, mmu.make_pte, val, (u64)val >> 32); > - else > - ret = PVOP_CALLEE1(pteval_t, mmu.make_pte, val); > + ret = PVOP_CALLEE1(pteval_t, mmu.make_pte, val); >
2020 Aug 09
2
[PATCH v3 4/7] x86/paravirt: remove 32-bit support from PARAVIRT_XXL
On 8/7/20 4:38 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: > @@ -377,10 +373,7 @@ static inline pte_t __pte(pteval_t val) > { > pteval_t ret; > > - if (sizeof(pteval_t) > sizeof(long)) > - ret = PVOP_CALLEE2(pteval_t, mmu.make_pte, val, (u64)val >> 32); > - else > - ret = PVOP_CALLEE1(pteval_t, mmu.make_pte, val); > + ret = PVOP_CALLEE1(pteval_t, mmu.make_pte, val); >
2020 Aug 07
0
[PATCH v3 4/7] x86/paravirt: remove 32-bit support from PARAVIRT_XXL
The last 32-bit user of stuff under CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL is gone. Remove 32-bit specific parts. Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross at suse.com> --- arch/x86/entry/vdso/vdso32/vclock_gettime.c | 1 + arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h | 92 +++------------------ arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h | 21 ----- arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable-3level_types.h | 5 --
2020 Aug 15
0
[PATCH v4 1/6] x86/paravirt: remove 32-bit support from PARAVIRT_XXL
The last 32-bit user of stuff under CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL is gone. Remove 32-bit specific parts. Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross at suse.com> --- arch/x86/entry/vdso/vdso32/vclock_gettime.c | 1 + arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h | 120 ++------------------ arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h | 21 ---- arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable-3level_types.h | 5 -
2020 Aug 10
1
[PATCH v3 4/7] x86/paravirt: remove 32-bit support from PARAVIRT_XXL
On 8/10/20 12:39 AM, J?rgen Gro? wrote: > On 09.08.20 04:34, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >> On 8/7/20 4:38 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: >>> @@ -377,10 +373,7 @@ static inline pte_t __pte(pteval_t val) >>> ? { >>> ????? pteval_t ret; >>> ? -??? if (sizeof(pteval_t) > sizeof(long)) >>> -??????? ret = PVOP_CALLEE2(pteval_t, mmu.make_pte, val, (u64)val
2008 May 31
9
[PATCH 0 of 4] mm+paravirt+xen: add pte read-modify-write abstraction (take 2)
Hi all, [ Change since last post: change name to ptep_modify_prot_, on the grounds that it isn't really a general pte-modification interface. ] This little series adds a new transaction-like abstraction for doing RMW updates to a pte, hooks it into paravirt_ops, and then makes use of it in Xen. The basic problem is that mprotect is very slow under Xen (up to 50x slower than native),
2008 May 31
9
[PATCH 0 of 4] mm+paravirt+xen: add pte read-modify-write abstraction (take 2)
Hi all, [ Change since last post: change name to ptep_modify_prot_, on the grounds that it isn't really a general pte-modification interface. ] This little series adds a new transaction-like abstraction for doing RMW updates to a pte, hooks it into paravirt_ops, and then makes use of it in Xen. The basic problem is that mprotect is very slow under Xen (up to 50x slower than native),
2008 May 31
9
[PATCH 0 of 4] mm+paravirt+xen: add pte read-modify-write abstraction (take 2)
Hi all, [ Change since last post: change name to ptep_modify_prot_, on the grounds that it isn't really a general pte-modification interface. ] This little series adds a new transaction-like abstraction for doing RMW updates to a pte, hooks it into paravirt_ops, and then makes use of it in Xen. The basic problem is that mprotect is very slow under Xen (up to 50x slower than native),
2008 May 23
6
[PATCH 0 of 4] mm+paravirt+xen: add pte read-modify-write abstraction
Hi all, This little series adds a new transaction-like abstraction for doing RMW updates to a pte, hooks it into paravirt_ops, and then makes use of it in Xen. The basic problem is that mprotect is very slow under Xen (up to 50x slower than native), primarily because of the ptent = ptep_get_and_clear(mm, addr, pte); ptent = pte_modify(ptent, newprot); /* ... */ set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte,
2008 May 23
6
[PATCH 0 of 4] mm+paravirt+xen: add pte read-modify-write abstraction
Hi all, This little series adds a new transaction-like abstraction for doing RMW updates to a pte, hooks it into paravirt_ops, and then makes use of it in Xen. The basic problem is that mprotect is very slow under Xen (up to 50x slower than native), primarily because of the ptent = ptep_get_and_clear(mm, addr, pte); ptent = pte_modify(ptent, newprot); /* ... */ set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte,
2008 May 23
6
[PATCH 0 of 4] mm+paravirt+xen: add pte read-modify-write abstraction
Hi all, This little series adds a new transaction-like abstraction for doing RMW updates to a pte, hooks it into paravirt_ops, and then makes use of it in Xen. The basic problem is that mprotect is very slow under Xen (up to 50x slower than native), primarily because of the ptent = ptep_get_and_clear(mm, addr, pte); ptent = pte_modify(ptent, newprot); /* ... */ set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte,
2007 Apr 18
17
[patch 00/17] paravirt_ops updates
Hi Andi, This series of patches updates paravirt_ops in various ways. Some of the changes are plain cleanups and improvements, and some add some interfaces necessary for Xen. The brief overview: add-MAINTAINERS.patch - obvious remove-CONFIG_DEBUG_PARAVIRT.patch - no longer needed paravirt-nop.patch - mark nop operations consistently paravirt-pte-accessors.patch - operations to pack/unpack