Re: [PATCH] xen: drop anti-dependency on X86_VISWS
(dropping netdev and the visws list) On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 11:07 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: On 04/06/2011 11:58 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 22:45 +0100, David Miller wrote: From: Ian Campbell ian.campb...@eu.citrix.com Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 10:55:55 +0100 You mean the !X86_VISWS I presume? It doesn't make sense to me either. No, I think 32-bit x86 allmodconfig elides XEN because of it's X86_TSC dependency. TSC is a real dependency of the Xen interfaces. Not really. The TSC register is a requirement, but that's going to be present on any CPU which can boot Xen. We don't need any of the kernel's TSC machinery though. So why the Kconfig dependency then? In principal a kernel compiled for a non-TSC processor (which meets the other requirements for Xen, such as PAE support) will run just fine under Xen on a newer piece of hardware. Is there any downside to this patch (is X86_CMPXCHG in the same sort of boat?) 8-- From 7204945696a927d281366f2a57baee37e2b43ca3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ian Campbell i...@hellion.org.uk Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 07:33:21 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] xen: remove Kconfig dependency on X86_TSC The TSC register is a requirement when running under Xen, but that's going to be present on any CPU which can boot Xen. We don't need any of the kernel's TSC machinery, since the usage is contained within the Xen interfaces, and therefore XEN does not need to depend on CONFIG_X86_TSC. Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell ian.campb...@citrix.com --- arch/x86/xen/Kconfig |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/Kconfig b/arch/x86/xen/Kconfig index 1c7121b..ac69c5b 100644 --- a/arch/x86/xen/Kconfig +++ b/arch/x86/xen/Kconfig @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ config XEN select PARAVIRT select PARAVIRT_CLOCK depends on X86_64 || (X86_32 X86_PAE !X86_VISWS) - depends on X86_CMPXCHG X86_TSC + depends on X86_CMPXCHG help This is the Linux Xen port. Enabling this will allow the kernel to boot in a paravirtualized environment under the -- 1.7.4.1 ___ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Re: [PATCH] xen: drop anti-dependency on X86_VISWS
(dropping netdev and visws list) On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 18:00 +0100, H. Peter Anvin wrote: On 04/06/2011 11:58 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: I'm not sure why ELAN belongs in the EXTENDED_PLATFORM option space rather than in the CPU choice option, since its only impact seems to be on -march, MODULE_PROC_FAMILY and some cpufreq drivers which doesn't sound like an extended platform to me but does it appear to be deliberate (see 9e111f3e167a x86: move ELAN to the NON_STANDARD_PLATFORM section, that was the old name for EXTENDED_PLATFORM). Historic... we used to have nonstandard A20M# handling on Elan, until it was discovered that we could make it work without it. Any reason not switch it over at this point then? 8-- From b1942fa168aee77537bf467e4c68c6f181b8fdee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ian Campbell i...@hellion.org.uk Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 07:42:29 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] x86: move AMD Elan Kconfig under Processor family Currently the option resides under X86_EXTENDED_PLATFORM due to historical nonstandard A20M# handling. However that is no longer the case and so Elan can be treated as part of the standard processor choice Kconfig option. Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell ian.campb...@citrix.com Cc: H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com --- arch/x86/Kconfig| 11 --- arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu| 16 ++-- arch/x86/Makefile_32.cpu|2 +- arch/x86/include/asm/module.h |2 +- arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/Kconfig |4 ++-- 5 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig index cc6c53a..f00a3f3 100644 --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig @@ -365,17 +365,6 @@ config X86_UV # Following is an alphabetically sorted list of 32 bit extended platforms # Please maintain the alphabetic order if and when there are additions -config X86_ELAN - bool AMD Elan - depends on X86_32 - depends on X86_EXTENDED_PLATFORM - ---help--- - Select this for an AMD Elan processor. - - Do not use this option for K6/Athlon/Opteron processors! - - If unsure, choose PC-compatible instead. - config X86_INTEL_CE bool CE4100 TV platform depends on PCI diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu b/arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu index d161e93..6a7cfdf 100644 --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu @@ -1,6 +1,4 @@ # Put here option for CPU selection and depending optimization -if !X86_ELAN - choice prompt Processor family default M686 if X86_32 @@ -203,6 +201,14 @@ config MWINCHIP3D stores for this CPU, which can increase performance of some operations. +config MELAN + bool AMD Elan + depends on X86_32 + ---help--- + Select this for an AMD Elan processor. + + Do not use this option for K6/Athlon/Opteron processors! + config MGEODEGX1 bool GeodeGX1 depends on X86_32 @@ -292,8 +298,6 @@ config X86_GENERIC This is really intended for distributors who need more generic optimizations. -endif - # # Define implied options from the CPU selection here config X86_INTERNODE_CACHE_SHIFT @@ -312,7 +316,7 @@ config X86_L1_CACHE_SHIFT int default 7 if MPENTIUM4 || MPSC default 6 if MK7 || MK8 || MPENTIUMM || MCORE2 || MATOM || MVIAC7 || X86_GENERIC || GENERIC_CPU - default 4 if X86_ELAN || M486 || M386 || MGEODEGX1 + default 4 if MELAN || M486 || M386 || MGEODEGX1 default 5 if MWINCHIP3D || MWINCHIPC6 || MCRUSOE || MEFFICEON || MCYRIXIII || MK6 || MPENTIUMIII || MPENTIUMII || M686 || M586MMX || M586TSC || M586 || MVIAC3_2 || MGEODE_LX config X86_XADD @@ -358,7 +362,7 @@ config X86_POPAD_OK config X86_ALIGNMENT_16 def_bool y - depends on MWINCHIP3D || MWINCHIPC6 || MCYRIXIII || X86_ELAN || MK6 || M586MMX || M586TSC || M586 || M486 || MVIAC3_2 || MGEODEGX1 + depends on MWINCHIP3D || MWINCHIPC6 || MCYRIXIII || MELAN || MK6 || M586MMX || M586TSC || M586 || M486 || MVIAC3_2 || MGEODEGX1 config X86_INTEL_USERCOPY def_bool y diff --git a/arch/x86/Makefile_32.cpu b/arch/x86/Makefile_32.cpu index f2ee1ab..86cee7b 100644 --- a/arch/x86/Makefile_32.cpu +++ b/arch/x86/Makefile_32.cpu @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ cflags-$(CONFIG_MATOM)+= $(call cc-option,-march=atom,$(call cc-option,-march= $(call cc-option,-mtune=atom,$(call cc-option,-mtune=generic)) # AMD Elan support -cflags-$(CONFIG_X86_ELAN) += -march=i486 +cflags-$(CONFIG_MELAN) += -march=i486 # Geode GX1 support cflags-$(CONFIG_MGEODEGX1) += -march=pentium-mmx diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/module.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/module.h index 67763c5..9eae775 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/module.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/module.h @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ #define MODULE_PROC_FAMILY K7 #elif defined CONFIG_MK8 #define MODULE_PROC_FAMILY K8 -#elif
Re: [PATCH] xen: drop anti-dependency on X86_VISWS
On 04/07/2011 11:38 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: Not really. The TSC register is a requirement, but that's going to be present on any CPU which can boot Xen. We don't need any of the kernel's TSC machinery though. So why the Kconfig dependency then? In principal a kernel compiled for a non-TSC processor (which meets the other requirements for Xen, such as PAE support) will run just fine under Xen on a newer piece of hardware. Not sure where it came from. It was probably never needed, or just added for some secondary effect we wanted. Is there any downside to this patch (is X86_CMPXCHG in the same sort of boat?) Only if we don't use cmpxchg in shared memory with other domains or the hypervisor. (I don't think it will dynamically switch between real and emulated cmpxchg depending on availability.) J ___ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: drop anti-dependency on X86_VISWS
On 08.04.11 at 17:25, Jeremy Fitzhardinge jer...@goop.org wrote: On 04/07/2011 11:38 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: Is there any downside to this patch (is X86_CMPXCHG in the same sort of boat?) Only if we don't use cmpxchg in shared memory with other domains or the hypervisor. (I don't think it will dynamically switch between real and emulated cmpxchg depending on availability.) Actually it does - see the #ifndef CONFIG_X86_CMPXCHG section in asm/cmpxchg_32.h. Jan ___ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: drop anti-dependency on X86_VISWS
On 04/08/2011 08:42 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: On 08.04.11 at 17:25, Jeremy Fitzhardinge jer...@goop.org wrote: On 04/07/2011 11:38 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: Is there any downside to this patch (is X86_CMPXCHG in the same sort of boat?) Only if we don't use cmpxchg in shared memory with other domains or the hypervisor. (I don't think it will dynamically switch between real and emulated cmpxchg depending on availability.) Actually it does - see the #ifndef CONFIG_X86_CMPXCHG section in asm/cmpxchg_32.h. Hm, OK. Still, I'm happiest with that dependency in case someone knobbles the cpu to exclude cmpxchg and breaks things. J ___ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Re: [PATCH] xen: drop anti-dependency on X86_VISWS
On 04/07/2011 11:46 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: Any reason not switch it over at this point then? Not really. -hpa ___ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
