From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Neuling Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/5] Eliminate double-copying of FP/VMX/VSX state Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 19:38:12 +1000 Message-ID: <26015.1378719492@ale.ozlabs.ibm.com> References: <20130807065220.GF31007@iris.ozlabs.ibm.com> <22410.1378711724@ale.ozlabs.ibm.com> <82B1ED9D-7FDA-4DCA-AE0E-C1057669E3B6@suse.de> Cc: Paul Mackerras , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Alexander Graf Return-path: In-reply-to: <82B1ED9D-7FDA-4DCA-AE0E-C1057669E3B6@suse.de> Sender: kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 09.09.2013, at 09:28, Michael Neuling wrote: > > >> At present, PR KVM and BookE KVM does multiple copies of FP and > >> related state because of the way that they use the arrays in the > >> thread_struct as an intermediate staging post for the state. They do > >> this so that they can use the existing system functions for loading > >> and saving state, and so that they can keep guest state in the CPU > >> registers while executing general kernel code. > >> > >> This patch series reorganizes things so that KVM and the main kernel > >> use the same representation for FP/VMX/VSX state, and so that guest > >> state can be loaded/save directly from/to the vcpu struct instead of > >> having to go via the thread_struct. This simplifies things and should > >> be a little faster. > >> > >> This series is against Alex Graf's kvm-ppc-queue branch plus my recent > >> series of 23 patches to make PR and HV KVM coexist. > > > > This is great! > > > > Alex, can you pull this into your tree? > > I never apply RFC patches if I can avoid it. Paul, if you think > they're ready for inclusion, please repost them as actual patches. Arrh, good point. I'll talk to paulus about reposting them. Your kvm-ppc-queue branch on github seems to be based on 3.11-rc1. Is that the tree we should be aiming for currently? Mikey