From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Split up pv-ops
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 16:04:48 +0100
Message-ID: <4B17D390.5050602@suse.de>
References: <1258503192-14246-1-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de> <4B17D0C7.1020805@suse.de> <4B17D290.9040507@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
	Glauber Costa <glommer@redhat.com>,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:56430 "EHLO mx1.suse.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1756181AbZLCPEn (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 3 Dec 2009 10:04:43 -0500
In-Reply-To: <4B17D290.9040507@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 12/03/2009 04:52 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> Alexander Graf wrote:
>>   
>>> Paravirt ops is currently only capable of either replacing a lot of
>>> Linux
>>> internal code or none at all. The are users that don't need all of the
>>> possibilities pv-ops delivers though.
>>>
>>> On KVM for example we're perfectly fine not using the PV MMU, thus not
>>> touching any MMU code. That way we don't have to improve pv-ops to
>>> become
>>> fast, we just don't compile the MMU parts in!
>>>
>>> This patchset splits pv-ops into several smaller config options
>>> split by
>>> feature category and then converts the KVM pv-ops code to use only the
>>> bits that are required, lowering overhead.
>>>
>>>      
>> So has this ended up in some tree yet?
>>    
>
> Don't think so.  I suggest you copy lkml and Ingo.

Sending off the complete set again? Rebased against what?