Re: [PATCH] paravirt.h

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

 



On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 01:44 -0700, Zachary Amsden wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >> Since this code is so rather, um, custom, I was going to reimplement 
> >> stop_machine in the module.
> >>     
> >
> > that sounds like a big mistake. I assume you want your VMI module to be
> > part of mainline for one.
> >
> > And this is the sort of thing that if we want to support it, we better
> > support it inside the main kernel, eg provide an api to modules to use
> > it, rather than having each module hack their own....
> >   
> 
> Yes, after discussion with Rusty, it appears that beefing up 
> stop_machine_run is the right way to go.  And it has benefits for 
> non-paravirt code as well, such as allowing plug-in kprobes or oprofile 
> extension modules to be loaded without having to deal with a debug 
> exception or NMI during module load/unload.


it's more than stop_machine; If we do allow this I think this has to be
a register_virtualization() function that does the lot. In common code.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux