From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: Paravirtualization on VMware's Platform [VMI]. Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 12:47:40 -0700 Message-ID: <4AB929DC.60002@goop.org> References: <1253233028.19731.63.camel@ank32.eng.vmware.com> <20090919224430.GB9567@kroah.com> <1253419185.3253.21.camel@ank32.eng.vmware.com> <20090920074247.GA5733@elte.hu> <1253647845.10565.20.camel@ank32.eng.vmware.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1253647845.10565.20.camel@ank32.eng.vmware.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: akataria@vmware.com Cc: Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , the arch/x86 maintainers , LKML , Chris Wright , Rusty Russell , "virtualization@lists.osdl.org" , Greg KH , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton Rusty Russell List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On 09/22/09 12:30, Alok Kataria wrote: > We can certainly look at removing some paravirt-hooks which are only > used by VMI. Not sure if there are any but will take a look when we > actually remove VMI. > There are a couple: * pte_update_defer * alloc_pmd_clone lguest appears to still use pte_update(), but I suspect its two callsites could be recast in the form of other existing pvops. J