* paravirt patches in -mm
@ 2006-10-01 4:01 Andrew Morton
2006-10-01 4:46 ` Zachary Amsden
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2006-10-01 4:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge, Rusty Russell, Zachary Amsden
Cc: virtualization@lists.osdl.org
Guys, could you please confirm that these patches from -mm:
paravirt-remove-read-hazard-from-cow.patch
paravirt-pte-clear-not-present.patch
paravirt-lazy-mmu-mode-hooks.patch
paravirt-combine-flush-accessed-dirty.patch
paravirt-kpte-flush.patch
paravirt-optimize-ptep-establish-for-pae.patch
paravirt-remove-set-pte-atomic.patch
paravirt-pae-compile-fix.patch
paravirt-update-pte-hook.patch
are suitable for mainline inclusion?
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: paravirt patches in -mm
2006-10-01 4:01 paravirt patches in -mm Andrew Morton
@ 2006-10-01 4:46 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-10-01 5:15 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Zachary Amsden @ 2006-10-01 4:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: virtualization@lists.osdl.org
Andrew Morton wrote:
> Guys, could you please confirm that these patches from -mm:
>
> paravirt-remove-read-hazard-from-cow.patch
> paravirt-pte-clear-not-present.patch
> paravirt-lazy-mmu-mode-hooks.patch
> paravirt-combine-flush-accessed-dirty.patch
> paravirt-kpte-flush.patch
> paravirt-optimize-ptep-establish-for-pae.patch
> paravirt-remove-set-pte-atomic.patch
> paravirt-pae-compile-fix.patch
> paravirt-update-pte-hook.patch
>
> are suitable for mainline inclusion?
>
Yes, these are all originally by me, and they are suitable for
mainline. They are either nops in mainline or are actually enhancements
to mainline, simplifying or optimizing the pte accessors on i386 and
have zero impact (or improved) impact on code generation and
performance. The only regrettable fact is that I broke PAE somewhere in
the middle of the series (thus requiring paravirt-pae-compile-fix as a
separate patch, when I should have rolled the fix into the proper
patch). But if you take the whole batch, there is no problem.
Zach
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: paravirt patches in -mm
2006-10-01 4:46 ` Zachary Amsden
@ 2006-10-01 5:15 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-02 6:48 ` Zachary Amsden
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2006-10-01 5:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zachary Amsden; +Cc: virtualization@lists.osdl.org
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 21:46:50 -0700
Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Guys, could you please confirm that these patches from -mm:
> >
> > paravirt-remove-read-hazard-from-cow.patch
> > paravirt-pte-clear-not-present.patch
> > paravirt-lazy-mmu-mode-hooks.patch
> > paravirt-combine-flush-accessed-dirty.patch
> > paravirt-kpte-flush.patch
> > paravirt-optimize-ptep-establish-for-pae.patch
> > paravirt-remove-set-pte-atomic.patch
> > paravirt-pae-compile-fix.patch
> > paravirt-update-pte-hook.patch
> >
> > are suitable for mainline inclusion?
> >
>
> Yes, these are all originally by me, and they are suitable for
> mainline. They are either nops in mainline or are actually enhancements
> to mainline, simplifying or optimizing the pte accessors on i386 and
> have zero impact (or improved) impact on code generation and
> performance.
OK, thanks.
> The only regrettable fact is that I broke PAE somewhere in
> the middle of the series (thus requiring paravirt-pae-compile-fix as a
> separate patch, when I should have rolled the fix into the proper
> patch).
I can find no PAE compile error, and paravirt-pae-compile-fix.patch just
removes a few config.h inclusions.
> But if you take the whole batch, there is no problem.
Well we don't like to break the build partway through a patch series
because that makes git-bisecting a pain if you happen to land at a bad
spot.
<ten compiles later>
It all looks good to me.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: paravirt patches in -mm
2006-10-01 5:15 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2006-10-02 6:48 ` Zachary Amsden
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Zachary Amsden @ 2006-10-02 6:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: virtualization@lists.osdl.org
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 21:46:50 -0700
> Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>>> Guys, could you please confirm that these patches from -mm:
>>>
>>> paravirt-remove-read-hazard-from-cow.patch
>>> paravirt-pte-clear-not-present.patch
>>> paravirt-lazy-mmu-mode-hooks.patch
>>> paravirt-combine-flush-accessed-dirty.patch
>>> paravirt-kpte-flush.patch
>>> paravirt-optimize-ptep-establish-for-pae.patch
>>> paravirt-remove-set-pte-atomic.patch
>>> paravirt-pae-compile-fix.patch
>>> paravirt-update-pte-hook.patch
>>>
>>> are suitable for mainline inclusion?
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, these are all originally by me, and they are suitable for
>> mainline. They are either nops in mainline or are actually enhancements
>> to mainline, simplifying or optimizing the pte accessors on i386 and
>> have zero impact (or improved) impact on code generation and
>> performance.
>>
>
> OK, thanks.
>
>
>> The only regrettable fact is that I broke PAE somewhere in
>> the middle of the series (thus requiring paravirt-pae-compile-fix as a
>> separate patch, when I should have rolled the fix into the proper
>> patch).
>>
>
> I can find no PAE compile error, and paravirt-pae-compile-fix.patch just
> removes a few config.h inclusions.
>
>
>> But if you take the whole batch, there is no problem.
>>
>
> Well we don't like to break the build partway through a patch series
> because that makes git-bisecting a pain if you happen to land at a bad
> spot.
>
Yes, I know.
> <ten compiles later>
>
> It all looks good to me.
>
Ah, ok, now I know what that was. It was pre-emptively fixing a later
PAE breakage caused by some include file manipulations that happen if
you include pgtable.h in certain assembler files.
Zach
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-10-02 6:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-10-01 4:01 paravirt patches in -mm Andrew Morton
2006-10-01 4:46 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-10-01 5:15 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-02 6:48 ` Zachary Amsden
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).