On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > I doubt Christoph's V4 was close to final yet, GRU wasn't covered at > all yet, not even mremap was covered at all (nor XPMEM nor GRU) in V4.
The GRU not covered? Why would you think that way? mremap is covered because of the callbacks in unmap_region(). > Being dependent on XPMEM support being merged, to merge KVM/GRU > doesn't sound a good idea. My patch provides no overhead with > MMU_NOTIFIER=n too. Hope Christoph agrees with my proposal to use #v5 > as the mmu core and to merge it in mainline with higher priority, to > mostly close the discussions on KVM and GRU (optimizations remains > possible) and to keep working incrementally on XPMEM and to push it in > mainline whenever you verified that it doesn't crash at runtime and > that you don't need yet another change of API. Please read the comments on your #5. #5 makes wrong assumptions about the nature of pte locks. As a result locking is broken. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
