On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 16:34:56 -0600
Andrew Jones <drjo...@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 06:50:04PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > KVM so far relies on code patching, and is likely to use it more
> > in the future. The main issue is that our alternative system works
> > at the instruction level, while we'd like to have alternatives at
> > the function level.
> How about setting static-keys at hyp init time?

That was an option I looked at. And while static keys would work to some
extent, they also have some nasty side effects:
- They create both a fast and a slow path. We don't want that - both
  path should be equally fast, or at least have as little overhead as
- We do need code patching for some assembly code, and using static
  keys on top creates a parallel mechanism that makes it hard to

You can view this alternative function call as a slightly different
kind of static keys - one that can give you the capability to handle
function calls instead of just jumping over code sequences. Both have
their own merits.


Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to