[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: core dom0 support

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>]

* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > Since it's the same kernel image i think the only truly reliable 
> > method would be to reboot between _different_ kernel images: 
> > same instructions but randomly re-align variables both in terms 
> > of absolute address and in terms of relative position to each 
> > other. Plus randomize bootmem allocs and never-gets-freed-really 
> > boot-time allocations.
> > 
> > Really hard to do i think ...
> > 
> 
> Ouch, yeah.
> 
> On the other hand, the numbers made sense to me, so I don't 
> see why there is any reason to distrust them.  They show a 5% 
> overhead with pv_ops enabled, reduced to a 2% overhead with 
> the changed.  That is more or less what would match my 
> intuition from seeing the code.

Yeah - it was Jeremy expressed doubt in the numbers, not me.

And we need to eliminate that 2% as well - 2% is still an awful 
lot of native kernel overhead from a kernel feature that 95%+ of 
users do not make any use of.

        Ingo

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel