Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 14 Oct 2011 12:10:33 -0700 | From | Jeremy Fitzhardinge <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC V5 00/11] Paravirtualized ticketlocks |
| |
On 10/14/2011 11:37 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 10/14/2011 10:02 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >> Jump labels are essentially binary: you can use path A or path B. pvops >> are multiway: there's no limit to the number of potential number of >> paravirtualized hypervisor implementations. At the moment we have 4: >> native, Xen, KVM and lguest. >> > This isn't (or shouldn't be) really true... it should be possible to do > an N-way jump label even if the current mechanism doesn't.
We probably don't want all those implementations (near) inline, so they would end up being plain function calls anyway.
J
| |