similar to: Introducing paravirt_ops for x86_64

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 7000 matches similar to: "Introducing paravirt_ops for x86_64"

2007 Aug 15
13
[PATCH 0/25][V3] pvops_64 last round (hopefully)
This is hopefully the last iteration of the pvops64 patch. >From the last version, we have only one change, which is include/asm-x86_64/processor.h: There were still one survivor in raw asm. Also, git screwed me up for some reason, and the 25th patch was missing the new files, paravirt.{c,h}. (although I do remember having git-add'ed it, but who knows...) Andrew, could you please push it
2007 Aug 15
13
[PATCH 0/25][V3] pvops_64 last round (hopefully)
This is hopefully the last iteration of the pvops64 patch. >From the last version, we have only one change, which is include/asm-x86_64/processor.h: There were still one survivor in raw asm. Also, git screwed me up for some reason, and the 25th patch was missing the new files, paravirt.{c,h}. (although I do remember having git-add'ed it, but who knows...) Andrew, could you please push it
2007 Aug 10
9
[PATCH 0/25 -v2] paravirt_ops for x86_64, second round
Here is an slightly updated version of the paravirt_ops patch. If your comments and criticism were welcome before, now it's even more! There are some issues that are _not_ addressed in this revision, and here are the causes: * split debugreg into multiple functions, suggested by Andi: - Me and jsfg agree that introducing more pvops (specially 14!) is not worthwhile. So, although we do
2007 Aug 10
9
[PATCH 0/25 -v2] paravirt_ops for x86_64, second round
Here is an slightly updated version of the paravirt_ops patch. If your comments and criticism were welcome before, now it's even more! There are some issues that are _not_ addressed in this revision, and here are the causes: * split debugreg into multiple functions, suggested by Andi: - Me and jsfg agree that introducing more pvops (specially 14!) is not worthwhile. So, although we do
2007 Nov 09
11
[PATCH 0/24] paravirt_ops for unified x86 - that's me again!
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
2007 Nov 09
11
[PATCH 0/24] paravirt_ops for unified x86 - that's me again!
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
2007 Dec 12
5
[PATCH 0/6] paravirt patches - the non-integration part
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
2007 Dec 12
5
[PATCH 0/6] paravirt patches - the non-integration part
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
2007 Oct 31
5
[PATCH 0/7] (Re-)introducing pvops for x86_64 - Real pvops work part
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
2007 Oct 31
5
[PATCH 0/7] (Re-)introducing pvops for x86_64 - Real pvops work part
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
2007 Dec 04
10
[PATCH 0/10] Integrate msr.h
Hello, This series of patches integrates msr.h header. What it really does, is a series of steps to allow us to get rid of duplicate code between i386 and x86_64 versions With this done, achieving paravirt for x86_64 gets really easy, just a couple of extra code. The first patch was already sent a while ago, but was not yet pushed to any tree , to my knowledge. So it is sent again. Also,
2007 Dec 04
10
[PATCH 0/10] Integrate msr.h
Hello, This series of patches integrates msr.h header. What it really does, is a series of steps to allow us to get rid of duplicate code between i386 and x86_64 versions With this done, achieving paravirt for x86_64 gets really easy, just a couple of extra code. The first patch was already sent a while ago, but was not yet pushed to any tree , to my knowledge. So it is sent again. Also,
2007 Oct 31
3
[PATCH 0/7] (Re-)introducing pvops for x86_64 - Consolidation part
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
2007 Oct 31
3
[PATCH 0/7] (Re-)introducing pvops for x86_64 - Consolidation part
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
2007 Dec 05
3
[PATCH 0/9 - v2] Integrate system.h
Hi, At Ingo's request, here it goes a new patchset, that actually applies ontop of the x86 tree (mm branch). Besides this issue, I've also included a patch that remove the cr8 references, as Andi suggested.
2007 Dec 05
3
[PATCH 0/9 - v2] Integrate system.h
Hi, At Ingo's request, here it goes a new patchset, that actually applies ontop of the x86 tree (mm branch). Besides this issue, I've also included a patch that remove the cr8 references, as Andi suggested.
2008 Jan 18
6
[PATCH 0/10] Tree fixes for PARAVIRT
Hi, This small series provides some more fixes towards the goal to have the PARAVIRT selectable for x86_64. After that, just some more small steps are needed. The first fix is not even specific for PARAVIRT, and it's actually preventing the whole tree from booting.
2008 Jan 18
6
[PATCH 0/10] Tree fixes for PARAVIRT
Hi, This small series provides some more fixes towards the goal to have the PARAVIRT selectable for x86_64. After that, just some more small steps are needed. The first fix is not even specific for PARAVIRT, and it's actually preventing the whole tree from booting.
2007 Dec 07
2
[PATCH 0/3] Unify segment headers
Hi, In this patch, I unify segment_32.h and segment_64.h into segment.h They have some common parts, but a considerable ammount of code still has to be around ifdefs. The only patch that is really important to paravirt is the first one, that moves a paravirt definition into the common header. The other two are just normal integration, and pretty much independent
2007 Dec 07
2
[PATCH 0/3] Unify segment headers
Hi, In this patch, I unify segment_32.h and segment_64.h into segment.h They have some common parts, but a considerable ammount of code still has to be around ifdefs. The only patch that is really important to paravirt is the first one, that moves a paravirt definition into the common header. The other two are just normal integration, and pretty much independent