From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: proposed interface change for setting the ldt Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 13:18:58 +0100 Message-ID: <44E701B2.8050005@goop.org> References: <44E599A3.6020907@goop.org> <44E621BA.6090001@vmware.com> <44E679ED.6010300@goop.org> <44E681B8.3020804@vmware.com> <20060819032249.GB10348@sequoia.sous-sol.org> <44E68857.6040806@vmware.com> <1155961927.9203.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1155961927.9203.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: Rusty Russell Cc: Chris Wright , Virtualization Mailing List List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org Rusty Russell wrote: > It sounds fine to me, although I'd like to see the patch. I don't have > anything against higher-level abstractions, if it helps any hypervisor, > as long as it doesn't warp the kernel code. And if most hypervisors and > native break it down the same way, well, we can always create helpers. > = Doing it this way does save a lot of complexity in the Xen case, which = would otherwise have to: 1. unpack the descriptor 2. if it's an LDT, save it off in a per-cpu structure 3. when load_ldt_desc is called, look up the structure, extract the base+size of the ldt, and make a hypercall to set the ldt vs 1. set the ldt J