similar to: [PATCH 2/5] Paravirt cpu batching.patch

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "[PATCH 2/5] Paravirt cpu batching.patch"

2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 2/6] Paravirt CPU hypercall batching mode
The VMI ROM has a mode where hypercalls can be queued and batched. This turns out to be a significant win during context switch, but must be done at a specific point before side effects to CPU state are visible to subsequent instructions. This is similar to the MMU batching hooks already provided. The same hooks could be used by the Xen backend to implement a context switch multicall. To
2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 2/6] Paravirt CPU hypercall batching mode
The VMI ROM has a mode where hypercalls can be queued and batched. This turns out to be a significant win during context switch, but must be done at a specific point before side effects to CPU state are visible to subsequent instructions. This is similar to the MMU batching hooks already provided. The same hooks could be used by the Xen backend to implement a context switch multicall. To
2013 Oct 31
1
[PATCH 3/3] x86: Support compiling out userspace I/O (iopl and ioperm)
Hi Josh, On Tue, Oct 22, 2013, at 3:35, Josh Triplett wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > entirely. Since these syscalls only exist to support rare legacy > userspace programs, X86_IOPORT does not depend
2013 Oct 31
1
[PATCH 3/3] x86: Support compiling out userspace I/O (iopl and ioperm)
Hi Josh, On Tue, Oct 22, 2013, at 3:35, Josh Triplett wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > entirely. Since these syscalls only exist to support rare legacy > userspace programs, X86_IOPORT does not depend
2007 Oct 01
2
[PATCH RFC] paravirt: cleanup lazy mode handling
Currently, the set_lazy_mode pv_op is overloaded with 5 functions: 1. enter lazy cpu mode 2. leave lazy cpu mode 3. enter lazy mmu mode 4. leave lazy mmu mode 5. flush pending batched operations This complicates each paravirt backend, since it needs to deal with all the possible state transitions, handling flushing, etc. In particular, flushing is quite distinct from the other 4 functions,
2007 Oct 01
2
[PATCH RFC] paravirt: cleanup lazy mode handling
Currently, the set_lazy_mode pv_op is overloaded with 5 functions: 1. enter lazy cpu mode 2. leave lazy cpu mode 3. enter lazy mmu mode 4. leave lazy mmu mode 5. flush pending batched operations This complicates each paravirt backend, since it needs to deal with all the possible state transitions, handling flushing, etc. In particular, flushing is quite distinct from the other 4 functions,
2007 Oct 09
0
[PATCH RFC REPOST 2/2] paravirt: clean up lazy mode handling
[ I think this is a straight repost this patch, which addresses all the previous comments. I'd like to submit this for .24 as the basis for a unified paravirt_ops. Any objections? ] Currently, the set_lazy_mode pv_op is overloaded with 5 functions: 1. enter lazy cpu mode 2. leave lazy cpu mode 3. enter lazy mmu mode 4. leave lazy mmu mode 5. flush pending batched operations This
2007 Oct 09
0
[PATCH RFC REPOST 2/2] paravirt: clean up lazy mode handling
[ I think this is a straight repost this patch, which addresses all the previous comments. I'd like to submit this for .24 as the basis for a unified paravirt_ops. Any objections? ] Currently, the set_lazy_mode pv_op is overloaded with 5 functions: 1. enter lazy cpu mode 2. leave lazy cpu mode 3. enter lazy mmu mode 4. leave lazy mmu mode 5. flush pending batched operations This
2013 Oct 22
0
[PATCH 3/3] x86: Support compiling out userspace I/O (iopl and ioperm)
On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel entirely. Since these syscalls only exist to support rare legacy userspace programs, X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still default to y. In addition to saving a significant
2014 Mar 11
0
[PATCHv2 3/3] x86: Support compiling out userspace I/O (iopl and ioperm)
On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these syscalls, so X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still default to y. In addition to saving a significant amount of
2013 Oct 26
1
[PATCH 3/3] x86: Support compiling out userspace I/O (iopl and ioperm)
I/O from userspace is used to implement usermode virtio driver(s). This has been done independently by Intel, Brocade/Vyatta, and 6Wind. Sorry, it has to stay. On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Josh Triplett <josh at joshtriplett.org> wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, >
2013 Oct 26
1
[PATCH 3/3] x86: Support compiling out userspace I/O (iopl and ioperm)
I/O from userspace is used to implement usermode virtio driver(s). This has been done independently by Intel, Brocade/Vyatta, and 6Wind. Sorry, it has to stay. On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Josh Triplett <josh at joshtriplett.org> wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, >
2014 Oct 29
0
[PATCH v3 3/3] x86: Support compiling out userspace I/O (iopl and ioperm)
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Josh Triplett <josh at joshtriplett.org> wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these > syscalls, so X86_IOPORT
2014 Oct 29
2
[PATCH v3 3/3] x86: Support compiling out userspace I/O (iopl and ioperm)
On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these syscalls, so X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still default to y. In addition to saving a significant amount of
2014 Oct 29
2
[PATCH v3 3/3] x86: Support compiling out userspace I/O (iopl and ioperm)
On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these syscalls, so X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still default to y. In addition to saving a significant amount of
2014 Nov 02
1
[PATCH v4 10/10] x86: Support compiling out userspace IO (iopl and ioperm)
On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the userspsace IO syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these syscalls, so X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still default to y. In addition to saving a significant amount of
2014 Nov 02
1
[PATCH v4 10/10] x86: Support compiling out userspace IO (iopl and ioperm)
On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the userspsace IO syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these syscalls, so X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still default to y. In addition to saving a significant amount of
2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 3/6] IOPL handling for paravirt guests
I found a clever way to make the extra IOPL switching invisible to non-paravirt compiles - since kernel_rpl is statically defined to be zero there, and only non-zero rpl kernel have a problem restoring IOPL, as popf does not restore IOPL flags unless run at CPL-0. Subject: IOPL handling for paravirt guests Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> diff -r 8110943fd7ad
2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 3/6] IOPL handling for paravirt guests
I found a clever way to make the extra IOPL switching invisible to non-paravirt compiles - since kernel_rpl is statically defined to be zero there, and only non-zero rpl kernel have a problem restoring IOPL, as popf does not restore IOPL flags unless run at CPL-0. Subject: IOPL handling for paravirt guests Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> diff -r 8110943fd7ad
2013 Oct 22
9
[PATCH 0/3] x86: Support compiling out userspace I/O (iopl and ioperm)
This patch series makes it possible to compile out the iopl and ioperm system calls, which allow privileged processes to request permission to directly poke I/O ports from userspace. Nothing on a modern Linux system uses these calls anymore, and anything new should be using /dev/port instead, or better yet writing a driver. Copying the bloat-o-meter stats from the final patch: 32-bit