Re: [PATCH] x86/paravirt: revert exports to restore old behaviour

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Date: Monday, November 19, 2007 - 6:14 pm

Takashi Iwai wrote:

Which kernel version are you using?  This is different in .24-rc
compared to .23.


These should be OK either way.  pv_irq_ops is not _GPL.


These could reasonably use the the native_* versions anyway, since the
driver won't be being used in an environment where these won't work. 
Perhaps they should be split out separate from the gdt/ldt operations,
which they should have no business touching.


Yeah, I guess they can be expected to play with pagetables.


Yeah.  It will explode if you are running in a virtual environment which
still gives the virtual machine graphics hardware access.


Yeah.  I think removing the difference between PARAVIRT and non-PARAVIRT
is enough to justify the exports.  If we want to make the policy
decision that modules can't use pagetable or msr operations at all, then
that's a separate decision which can be applied uniformly to PARAVIRT
and non-PARAVIRT.

    J
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
REGRESSION: 2.6.24 breaks nvidia and amd/ati binary driver ..., Tobias Powalowski, (Tue Nov 13, 3:39 am)
[PATCH] x86/paravirt: revert exports to restore old behaviour, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Tue Nov 13, 1:21 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86/paravirt: revert exports to restore old be ..., Christoph Hellwig, (Tue Nov 13, 3:22 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86/paravirt: revert exports to restore old be ..., Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Tue Nov 13, 6:22 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86/paravirt: revert exports to restore old be ..., Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Mon Nov 19, 6:14 pm)