From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: Performance numbers on PV-on-HVM Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 15:19:36 -0700 Message-ID: <4CA65E78.1000400@goop.org> References: <4CA2698B.5010901@xmerlin.org> <4CA4DD48.4030704@xmerlin.org> <20101001141308.GO2804@reaktio.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Christian Zoffoli List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 10/01/2010 07:16 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Fri, 1 Oct 2010, Pasi K??rkk??inen wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 03:06:12PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> On Thu, 30 Sep 2010, Christian Zoffoli wrote: >>>> Il 29/09/2010 11:10, Stefano Stabellini ha scritto: >>>> [cut] >>>>> Yes, you are right. >>>>> A little while back I backported the whole series to 2.6.32 and the >>>>> result was included the Jeremy's pvops main branch, but I haven't kept >>>>> it completely up to date. >>>>> The new changes that are only in the 2.6.35-rc5-pvhvm-v7 branch regards >>>>> PV spinlocks, the balloon driver and the PV console. >>>> that's a good news but in my experience the pv_ops kernel is not as >>>> stable as the suse xenified kernel >>>> ...imho the best would be to have clean patches for a 3.6.32.x vanilla >>>> kernel ...so we can do packages close to the official ones ...with only >>>> this great addition. >>>> >>> >>> I have just done a backport to 2.6.32 of the whole series, branch name >>> 2.6.32-pvhvm; I'll try to keep it up to date. >>> It should be easy to rebase the series on the latest 2.6.32 stable >>> kernel or to apply CVE fixes on top of this branch. >>> >> Hopefully Jeremy merges 2.6.32-pvhvm to xen/stable-2.6.32.x branch.. > > The problem is that Jeremy's stable branch is sufficiently different > from stable 2.6.32 that the port in non-trivial. > It would probably easier for him to cherry-pick the last 6 patches in > the series. I tried this, but it is a bit awkward: Two of them have already been applied verbatim. The blkfront name patch clashes with something similar that's already in xen/next (the version I currently have does xlbd_reserve_minors(), but this branch's patch doesn't). I don't know which version to take. The hvc console patches clash fairly badly with the dom0 ones; nothing fundamental, but fiddly. The balloon.c changes clash with the largepage ballooning stuff. J