From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
To: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Murray <murrayie@yahoo.co.uk>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: Xen 4.3: x86 32 bit code removed or depreciated?
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:03:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51DD4D76.9050109@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFLBxZbeWSyseCxSUkeeChUn7y3JL+TLj=SP4gHi+ppDoKK6hw@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/07/13 12:32, George Dunlap wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Ian Murray <murrayie@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> Just to be clear, this is the 32-bit *hypervisor* which was removed.
>>> 32-bit tools in a 32-bit dom0 still work.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks. Thanks for clearing that up. Perhaps off-topic for dev, but are there any advantages to running a 32 bit dom0 as in this configuration?
>
> Probably the biggest thing is about performance. Until the PVH mode
> is implemented, 64-bit PV guests will have a performance degradation,
> due to the way the architecture changed between 32-bit and 64-bit.
This isn't really that true for real dom0 workloads.
Most of the theoretical performance penalty caused by system calls
having to trap into the hypervisor are offset by the general performance
improvement of the amd64 archiecture (e.g., more general purpose
registers and the lack of high memory needing bouncing/mapping all the
time).
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-10 12:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-10 10:23 Xen 4.3: x86 32 bit code removed or depreciated? Ian Murray
2013-07-10 10:34 ` Jan Beulich
2013-07-10 11:08 ` Matthew Daley
2013-07-10 11:21 ` George Dunlap
2013-07-10 11:10 ` George Dunlap
2013-07-10 11:28 ` Ian Murray
2013-07-10 11:32 ` George Dunlap
2013-07-10 12:03 ` David Vrabel [this message]
2013-07-10 12:44 ` Ian Murray
2013-07-10 11:18 ` Ian Murray
2013-07-10 11:28 ` George Dunlap
2013-07-10 13:04 ` Ian Murray
2013-07-10 13:15 ` George Dunlap
2013-07-10 14:42 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
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=51DD4D76.9050109@citrix.com \
--to=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=murrayie@yahoo.co.uk \
--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.