From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Wright Subject: Re: What do we need to do to hit 2.6.19? Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 15:21:47 -0700 Message-ID: <20060804222147.GP2654@sequoia.sous-sol.org> References: <44D39351.9070405@goop.org> <200608050014.17061.ak@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200608050014.17061.ak@suse.de> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: Andi Kleen Cc: Chris Wright , virtualization@lists.osdl.org List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org * Andi Kleen (ak@suse.de) wrote: > On Friday 04 August 2006 20:34, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > Chris said, and I agree, that we should try to get the basic PV-ops = > > infrastructure stuff into 2.6.19. To me this means being able to run a = > > kernel native with CONFIG_PARAVIRT, and see little or no functional or = > > performance degradation. What do we need to do to get there: > > = > > * fix the slowdown bug, which seems to be something to do with > > rdmsr/wrmsr on SMP systems > > * work out how to handle all the low-level system interfaces, like > > ACPI, PnP BIOS, APM > > * what else? > = > You're already too late for most of this. The merge window will > open in the forseeable future and you don't have had significant > -mm* or x86_64-* testing yet and in general stuff is still > very fresh. > = > Maybe we can get some basic "obvious" stuff like a few = > macro substitutions in (if you submit them properly), but probably not = > the full support. I don't agree. We've got the first bit of obvious stuff posted and queued up. There's a bit more, then the final piece is #ifdef that means none of the new code will even get compiled for non CONFIG_PARAVIRT users (mark it as experimental, default =3D N, etc). Then we have a safe place to push things up w/out disturbing others. IOW, at that point it's like a new device driver, or fs, or arch....those can merge quite late. Not saying it's not agressive, but I don't think it's obviously too late. thanks, -chris