similar to: [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

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

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,

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,

[ 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

[ 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

plain text document attachment (xx-paravirt-core.patch) Paravirt Ops core files. Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt srostedt@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@redhat.com> Index: clean-start/arch/x86_64/kernel/paravirt.c =================================================================== --- /dev/null +++ clean-start/arch/x86_64/kernel/paravirt.c @@ -0,0 +1,504 @@ +/*

plain text document attachment (xx-paravirt-core.patch) Paravirt Ops core files. Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt srostedt@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@redhat.com> Index: clean-start/arch/x86_64/kernel/paravirt.c =================================================================== --- /dev/null +++ clean-start/arch/x86_64/kernel/paravirt.c @@ -0,0 +1,504 @@ +/*

[ 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? ] This patch refactors the paravirt_ops structure into groups of functionally related ops: pv_info - random info, rather than function entrypoints pv_init_ops - functions used at boot time (some for module_init

[ 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? ] This patch refactors the paravirt_ops structure into groups of functionally related ops: pv_info - random info, rather than function entrypoints pv_init_ops - functions used at boot time (some for module_init

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

This patch refactors the paravirt_ops structure into groups of functionally related ops: pv_info - random info, rather than function entrypoints pv_init_ops - functions used at boot time (some for module_init too) pv_misc_ops - lazy mode, which didn't fit well anywhere else pv_time_ops - time-related functions pv_cpu_ops - various privileged instruction ops pv_irq_ops - operations for

This patch refactors the paravirt_ops structure into groups of functionally related ops: pv_info - random info, rather than function entrypoints pv_init_ops - functions used at boot time (some for module_init too) pv_misc_ops - lazy mode, which didn't fit well anywhere else pv_time_ops - time-related functions pv_cpu_ops - various privileged instruction ops pv_irq_ops - operations for

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

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, >

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, >

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

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

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

Here's a first attempt at splitting up paravirt_ops into more specific chunks. Its pretty clunky and chunky; mostly just a lot of replacement. The grouping of ops is very first cut; I'm open to suggestions about what groups should exist and what ops they each should contain. The only slightly subtle part is that I've kept the structures wrapped in a paravirt_ops structure,