Re: [PATCH 0/2] kvm: disable virtualization on kdump

From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	Haren Myneni <hbabu@us.ibm.com>,
	Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] kvm: disable virtualization on kdump
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 11:41:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <49082FD0.3040009@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m18ws84gxc.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org>

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> I think I will get flamed if I try to pull to the core a bunch of code
>> that always lived in the KVM module.  8)
>>     
>
> Why is KVM modular anyway?  That seems like some pretty core cpu functionality...
>   

Many reasons.  Developers like the ability to rmmod and modprobe during 
development.  Distros like to keep their non-modular core small.  There 
is an external module distribution that allows users to graft a new kvm 
on an old kernel, which our testers and bleeding edge users like.  
Because it's there.

There's always CONFIG_KVM=y if you don't want it.

> Depending.  It doesn't sound like svm has the problem where init doesn't
> work so svm really doesn't need to do this.
>   

svm can writeback into memory at odd times if we don't do this, and the 
cost is small - clear a bit in EFER.  There's no reason to be lazy.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec