Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 4 Aug 2006 17:40:39 -0400 | From | "Bill Rugolsky Jr." <> | Subject | Re: A proposal - binary |
| |
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 02:26:20PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > >I also am missing something here. how can a system be compiled to do > >several different things for the same privilaged opcode (including > >running that opcode) without turning that area of code into a > >performance pig as it checks for each possible hypervisor being present? > > Conceptually, the paravirtops structure is a structure of pointers to > functions which get filled in at runtime to support whatever hypervisor > we're running over. But it also has the means to patch inline versions > of the appropriate code sequences for performance-critical operations.
Perhaps Ulrich and Jakub should join this discussion, as the whole thing sounds like a rehash of the userland ld.so + glibc versioned ABI. glibc has weathered 64-bit LFS changes to open(), SYSENTER, and vdso.
Isn't this discussion entirely analogous (except for the patching of performance critical sections, perhaps) to taking a binary compiled against glibc-2.0 back on Linux-2.2 and running it on glibc-2.4 + 2.6.17? Or OpenSolaris, for that matter?
Bill Rugolsky - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |