Re: [Xen-devel] passing hypercall parameters by pointer

[Jimi Xenidis <jimix@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>>>> "HB" == Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

hmm let me bubble up my intro :)

 HB> I know that's an idea Jimi isn't fond of, but it really seems
 HB> like the best solution here.

Why I dislike this solution.
  1. Currently, the kernel has no intimate knowledge of the managment
     calls.  This is goodness since this gives the freedom to
     "innovate" in the management area without impacting the kernel,
     we now would require kernel updates that grok management
     structures, creating more opportunity for versioning chaos and
     bloating of the kernel patch.
  2. We are complicating the kernel and the hypervisor in order to
     keep a user app simple.  Does anyone care that a user app suffer
     a little performace impact?  Frankly, I'm much more worried about
     unecessarily impacting the hypervisor.

I believe a negotiated managment area that the application serializes
all arguements into to be a far better solution, the area can be of
arbitrary size and it the added complexity to the application is
trivial.

Am I missing something?
-JX


-- 
 "I got an idea, an idea so smart my head would explode if I even
  began to know what I was talking about." -- Peter Griffin (Family Guy)


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel