Re: [PATCH][RFC] Supporting Enlightened Windows2008Server

["Ky Srinivasan" <ksrinivasan@novell.com>]

>>> On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at  5:21 AM, in message
<C41D032F.1600F%keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>, Keir Fraser
<keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com> wrote: 
> On 5/4/08 00:24, "Ky Srinivasan" <ksrinivasan@novell.com> wrote:
> 
>> Based on the feedback I got from you and Tim, I am enclosing the next 
> version
>> of the patches to support enlightened win2008 server. Here are the changes I
>> have made:
>> 
>> 1) I have put the shim on a low calorie diet - I have gotten rid of the
>> framework infrastructure and to the extent possible integrated the shim code
>> with xen.
>> 
>> 2) I have tried to cleanup the code. I am sure  more work will be needed 
> here.
>> 
>> 3) I am not advertising the TLB related enlightenments. We can revisit this
>> later if needed.
> 
> It's certainly quite a bit shorter which is good. For the remaining stuff,
> do you have empirical evidence that performance is improved by it?
> 
I do. On the NetBench runs we did, we were seeing close to 10% improvement. I will keep you posted on other benchmark results as they become available. Furthermore, as MSFT defines new enlightenments, we can implement those cleanly within this body of code. Additionally, there is value in claiming that we support all the enlightenments needed for hosting enlightened win 2008 servers.

> Other more minor comments are that the coding style is still off (e.g.,
> start braces should go on their own line, spaces inside () for if/for/while
> headers), you have at least one big switch statement where most of the cases
> could be collapsed to just one shared block of code, and indeed shouldn't
> the 'default' case in the hypercall demuxing switch statement be to return
> 'denied', and that would get rid of most of the individual cases altogether?

In the next version of these patches, I will address the issues you have raised here.


Thanks,

K. Y
> 
>  -- Keir