Re: [Xen-devel] RFC on deprivileged x86 hypervisor device models

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 17.07.15 at 17:19, <Ben.Catterall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 17/07/15 15:20, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> If not, then method 2 would seem quite a bit less troublesome than
>> method 1, yet method 3 would (even if more involved in terms of
>> changes to be done) perhaps result in the most elegant result.
> I agree that method three is more elegant. If both you and Andrew are ok 
> with going in a per-vcpu stack direction for Xen in general then I'll 
> write a per-vcpu patch first and then do another patch which adds the 
> ring 3 feature on-top of that.

Actually improvements to common/wait.c have also been thought of
long ago already, for whenever per-vCPU stacks would be available.
The few users of these interfaces never resulted in this becoming
important enough a work item, unfortunately.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel