From: Alexandru Stefan ISAILA <aisaila@bitdefender.com>
To: "rcojocaru@bitdefender.com" <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>,
"jbeulich@suse.com" <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/domctl: Don't pause the whole domain if only getting vcpu state
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 15:28:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1505834912.26526.9.camel@bitdefender.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <59C0B4FC02000078001067F9@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
On Ma, 2017-09-19 at 00:11 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com> 09/18/17 7:05 PM
> > > > >>>
> > On 09/18/2017 06:35 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 12.09.17 at 15:53, <aisaila@bitdefender.com> wrote:
> > > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
> > > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
> > > > @@ -625,6 +625,26 @@ long arch_do_domctl(
> > > > !is_hvm_domain(d) )
> > > > break;
> > > >
> > > > + if ( domctl->u.hvmcontext_partial.type ==
> > > > HVM_SAVE_CODE(CPU) &&
> > > > + domctl->u.hvmcontext_partial.instance < d-
> > > > >max_vcpus )
> > > I have to admit that I'm not in favor of such special casing,
> > > even
> > > less so without any code comment saying why this is so special.
> > > What if someone else wanted some other piece of vCPU state
> > > without pausing the entire domain? Wouldn't it be possible to
> > > generalize this to cover all such state elements?
> > There's no reason why all the other cases where this would the
> > possible
> > shouldn't be optimized. What has made this one stand out for us is
> > that
> > we're using it a lot with introspection, and the optimization
> > counts.
> >
> > But judging by the code reorganization (the addition of
> > hvm_save_one_cpu_ctxt()), the changes would need to be done on a
> > one-by-one case anyway (different queries may require different
> > ways of
> > chaging the code).
> But this function addition is precisely what I'd like to avoid in
> favor of
> an extension to the existing mechanism using the registered function
> pointers.
>
What will be a suitable extend of the current call back system?
Regards,
Alex
________________________
This email was scanned by Bitdefender
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-19 15:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-12 13:53 [PATCH] x86/domctl: Don't pause the whole domain if only getting vcpu state Alexandru Isaila
2017-09-18 15:35 ` Jan Beulich
2017-09-18 17:03 ` Razvan Cojocaru
2017-09-19 6:11 ` Jan Beulich
2017-09-19 15:28 ` Alexandru Stefan ISAILA [this message]
2017-09-19 15:44 ` Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1505834912.26526.9.camel@bitdefender.com \
--to=aisaila@bitdefender.com \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=rcojocaru@bitdefender.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.