From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Ky Srinivasan" Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Supporting Enlightened Windows2008Server Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 08:28:40 -0600 Message-ID: <47F9F6F7.E57C.0030.0@novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Tim Deegan , Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>> On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 5:21 AM, in message , Keir Fraser wrote:=20 > On 5/4/08 00:24, "Ky Srinivasan" wrote: >=20 >> Based on the feedback I got from you and Tim, I am enclosing the = next=20 > version >> of the patches to support enlightened win2008 server. Here are the = changes I >> have made: >>=20 >> 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. >>=20 >> 2) I have tried to cleanup the code. I am sure more work will be = needed=20 > here. >>=20 >> 3) I am not advertising the TLB related enlightenments. We can revisit = this >> later if needed. >=20 > 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? >=20 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/whi= le > 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 >=20 > -- Keir