[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] paravirt_ops and its alternatives

To: "Dong, Eddie" <eddie.dong@xxxxxxxxx>, "Dong, Eddie" <eddie.dong@xxxxxxxxx>, <xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Yang, Fred" <fred.yang@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 09:24:03 -0800
Delivery-date: Sun, 03 Feb 2008 09:24:31 -0800
List-id: Discussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
Thread-index: Achjn0ZufOhY5Z8sQpe80SLaWI0ZQABl5LagAFSJcrA=
Thread-topic: [Xen-ia64-devel] paravirt_ops and its alternatives

Dong, Eddie wrote:
> Re-post it to warmup discussion in case people can't read PPT format,

IVT is very performance sensitive for the native Linux, how about dual
IVT tables alternative for CPU virtualization?  It would need
maintainance effort but it would be much cleaner forIA64 situation.
-Fred

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel

Follow-Ups:
- RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] paravirt_ops and its alternatives
  - From: Dong, Eddie

References:
- RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] paravirt_ops and its alternatives
  - From: Dong, Eddie

Prev by Date: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] MINSTATE_PHYS?
Next by Date: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] MINSTATE_PHYS?
Previous by thread: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] paravirt_ops and its alternatives
Next by thread: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] paravirt_ops and its alternatives
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.