[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: core dom0 support
* Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I hate to be the one to say it, but we should sit down and > work out whether it is justifiable to merge any of this into > Linux. I think it's still the case that the Xen technology is > the "old" way and that the world is moving off in the "new" > direction, KVM? > > In three years time, will we regret having merged this? Personally i'd like to see a sufficient reply to the mmap-perf paravirt regressions pointed out by Nick and reproduced by myself as well. (They were in the 4-5% macro-performance range iirc, which is huge.) So i havent seen any real progress on reducing native kernel overhead with paravirt. Patches were sent but no measurements were done and it seemed to have all fizzled out while the dom0 patches are being pursued. Which is not a particularly good basis on which to add even _more_ paravirt stuff, is it? Ingo _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |