similar to: [PATCH 1/5] Change vsmp compile dependency

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 01:14:34 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.25-rc5/2.6.25-rc5-mm1/ randconfig (x86_64) with PCI=n PARAVIRT=y VSMP=n ends with arch/x86/kernel/built-in.o: In function `is_vsmp_box': (.text+0x1178d): undefined reference to `early_pci_allowed' arch/x86/kernel/built-in.o: In function `is_vsmp_box':

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 01:14:34 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.25-rc5/2.6.25-rc5-mm1/ randconfig (x86_64) with PCI=n PARAVIRT=y VSMP=n ends with arch/x86/kernel/built-in.o: In function `is_vsmp_box': (.text+0x1178d): undefined reference to `early_pci_allowed' arch/x86/kernel/built-in.o: In function `is_vsmp_box':

Hi, This series of five patches turns the vsmp architecture support in x86_64 into a paravirt client. If PARAVIRT is on, the probe function vsmp_init() is run unconditionally, patching the necessary irq functions accordingly if running ontop of such box.

Hi, This series of five patches turns the vsmp architecture support in x86_64 into a paravirt client. If PARAVIRT is on, the probe function vsmp_init() is run unconditionally, patching the necessary irq functions accordingly if running ontop of such box.

Paravirt ops is currently only capable of either replacing a lot of Linux internal code or none at all. The are users that don't need all of the possibilities pv-ops delivers though. On KVM for example we're perfectly fine not using the PV MMU, thus not touching any MMU code. That way we don't have to improve pv-ops to become fast, we just don't compile the MMU parts in! This

Paravirt ops is currently only capable of either replacing a lot of Linux internal code or none at all. The are users that don't need all of the possibilities pv-ops delivers though. On KVM for example we're perfectly fine not using the PV MMU, thus not touching any MMU code. That way we don't have to improve pv-ops to become fast, we just don't compile the MMU parts in! This

I have a 10 blade cluster of just hardware - I can install what I want, how I want. ? What options are there if I wanted to build the 10 blades as one large beast, but _NOT_ necessarily for someone doing grid-type work? ? ?Some users don't now how to program that way, but they'd like to have their program run on something that acts like a single processor, but a massive single processor

Hello, we have two bugs filed for Linux-x86 and Linux-x86-64 both using OCFS2 for their 9.2.0.7 DB installation. Strange thing happening in these two ports is, after DB got created, we are seeing 'Corrupt data block' messages in alert logs and when the same blocks verified connecting to database appears to be clean. This inconsistency is stopping customer to go further use DB. This

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

Hi folks, Here is the result of the latest work on the pvops front, after the x86 arch merge. From the functionality point of view, almost nothing was changed, except for proper vsmp support - which was discussed, but not implemented before - and the introduction of smp_ops in x86_64, which eased the merging of the smp header. Speaking of the merge, a significant part (although not majority) of

Hi folks, Here is the result of the latest work on the pvops front, after the x86 arch merge. From the functionality point of view, almost nothing was changed, except for proper vsmp support - which was discussed, but not implemented before - and the introduction of smp_ops in x86_64, which eased the merging of the smp header. Speaking of the merge, a significant part (although not majority) of

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

Three patches to clean up GDT access in Linux to make it friendly to virtualization environments. The basic problem is that the GDT must be write protected, which causes spurious overhead when the GDT lies on the same page as other data. This problem exists both for VMware and Xen; Xen actually requires page isolation, so we have implemented the most general and compatible solution. Patch 1

Three patches to clean up GDT access in Linux to make it friendly to virtualization environments. The basic problem is that the GDT must be write protected, which causes spurious overhead when the GDT lies on the same page as other data. This problem exists both for VMware and Xen; Xen actually requires page isolation, so we have implemented the most general and compatible solution. Patch 1

Hi Andi, This is a series of patches based on your latest queue (as of the other day, at least). It includes: - the most recent patch to compute the appropriate amount of percpu space to allocate, using a separate reservation for modules where needed. - make the percpu sections page-aligned, so that percpu variables can be page aligned if needed (which is used by gdt_page) -

Hi Andi, This is a series of patches based on your latest queue (as of the other day, at least). It includes: - the most recent patch to compute the appropriate amount of percpu space to allocate, using a separate reservation for modules where needed. - make the percpu sections page-aligned, so that percpu variables can be page aligned if needed (which is used by gdt_page) -

Hi folks, After some time away from it, and a big rebase as a consequence, here is the updated version of paravirt_ops for x86_64, heading to inclusion. Your criticism is of course, very welcome. Have fun -- arch/x86_64/Kconfig | 11 arch/x86_64/ia32/syscall32.c | 2 arch/x86_64/kernel/Makefile | 1 arch/x86_64/kernel/apic.c | 2

Hi folks, After some time away from it, and a big rebase as a consequence, here is the updated version of paravirt_ops for x86_64, heading to inclusion. Your criticism is of course, very welcome. Have fun -- arch/x86_64/Kconfig | 11 arch/x86_64/ia32/syscall32.c | 2 arch/x86_64/kernel/Makefile | 1 arch/x86_64/kernel/apic.c | 2

Instead of using six globally visible paravirt ops structures combine them in a single structure, keeping the original structures as sub-structures. This avoids the need to assemble struct paravirt_patch_template at runtime on the stack each time apply_paravirt() is being called (i.e. when loading a module). Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross at suse.com> --- arch/x86/hyperv/mmu.c

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