From: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
To: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] kexec/x86_64: Use one page table in x86_64 machine_kexec
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 12:06:52 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aec7e5c30902031906k7fe8947kc429ffc0274eb930@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090204022905.GM7199@verge.net.au>
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 02:22:48PM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
>> Impact: reduce kernel BSS size by 7 pages, improve code readability
>>
>> Two page tables are used in current x86_64 kexec implementation. One
>> is used to jump from kernel virtual address to identity map address,
>> the other is used to map all physical memory. In fact, on x86_64,
>> there is no conflict between kernel virtual address space and physical
>> memory space, so just one page table is sufficient. The page table
>> pages used to map control page are dynamically allocated to save
>> memory if kexec image is not loaded. ASM code used to map control page
>> is replaced by C code too.
>
> Hi Huang,
>
> this patch looks quite nice to me. I am CCing my former colleague Magnus
> Damm for comment. He did some work in this area a little while ago.
Thanks for the ping Simon!
I like the idea of dynamically allocating pages and writing code in C
instead of ASM. In fact, this patch is not so far away from what V2 of
my patches did a few years ago:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/5/24/12
For one reason or another this wasn't acceptable at that point so I
rewrote things and V4 got merged with static page tables and ASM code.
This patch is a step in the right direction IMO, but I'm not sure how
it affects the Xen dom0 implementation. Does it still work and/or does
anyone care?
Cheers,
/ magnus
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-04 3:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-03 6:22 Huang Ying
2009-02-04 2:29 ` Simon Horman
2009-02-04 3:06 ` Magnus Damm [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aec7e5c30902031906k7fe8947kc429ffc0274eb930@mail.gmail.com \
--to=magnus.damm@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®