Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 5/7] x86/domain: Optimise the order of actions in arch_domain_create()

2018-03-16 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 15.03.18 at 21:15, wrote: > On 09/03/18 16:54, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 09.03.18 at 14:18, wrote: >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c >>> @@ -430,20 +430,37 @@ int arch_domain_create(struct domain *d, unsigned int >>> domcr_flags, >>>

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 5/7] x86/domain: Optimise the order of actions in arch_domain_create()

2018-03-15 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 09/03/18 16:54, Jan Beulich wrote: On 09.03.18 at 14:18, wrote: >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c >> @@ -430,20 +430,37 @@ int arch_domain_create(struct domain *d, unsigned int >> domcr_flags, >> struct xen_arch_domainconfig *config) >>

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 5/7] x86/domain: Optimise the order of actions in arch_domain_create()

2018-03-13 Thread Roger Pau Monné
On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 01:18:40PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote: > The only relevent initialisation for the idle domain is the context switch and ^ relevant > poisoned pointers. Collect these bits together early in the function and exit > when complete (although as a consequence, the e820

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 5/7] x86/domain: Optimise the order of actions in arch_domain_create()

2018-03-09 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 09.03.18 at 14:18, wrote: > --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c > @@ -430,20 +430,37 @@ int arch_domain_create(struct domain *d, unsigned int > domcr_flags, > struct xen_arch_domainconfig *config) > { > bool paging_initialised = false; >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 5/7] x86/domain: Optimise the order of actions in arch_domain_create()

2018-03-09 Thread Wei Liu
On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 01:18:40PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote: > The only relevent initialisation for the idle domain is the context switch and > poisoned pointers. Collect these bits together early in the function and exit > when complete (although as a consequence, the e820 and vtsc lock > initi