Re: [PATCH]0/2 Patches to furthure split kvm_init

[Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>]

Hollis Blanchard wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 16:50 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
>   
>> Carsten Otte wrote:
>>     
>>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>       
>>>> But you do need the vcpu cache, right?
>>>>         
>>> I think about organizing our SIE control blocks in it, just like vmx
>>> and svm do with their hardware structures backing a vcpu state.
>>> They're 512 bytes in size, and need to start on a 512-byte boundary.
>>> Sorry about my previous answer, I was confused by vcpu_cache /
>>> vcpu_decache for x86. It's friday...
>>>       
>> Ah, so you even need the alignment (which happen to be exactly the x86
>> fpu alignment).
>>
>> So we have two archs needing special allocation, and two archs using a
>> common allocator.
>>     
>
> I think it's clear that this is an area that is likely to be very
> architecture-specific, and I don't think that duplicating
> kmem_cache_create() for each architecture is a big deal at all.
>   

No, it isn't, but having a KVM_ARCH_HAS_VCPU_ALLOC isn't either.



-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell.  From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream.  Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4