Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 May 2008 12:29:52 +0300 | From | Avi Kivity <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] kmemcheck: SMP support |
| |
Vegard Nossum wrote: > On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote: > >> Vegard, wanna have a look at introducing per CPU kernel pagetables? I >> tried that once in the past and it wasnt too horrible. (the patches are >> gone though) We could do it before bringing other CPUs online, i.e. much >> of the really yucky boot time pagetable juggling phase would be over >> already. Hm? >> > > Ingo. > > It really doesn't matter how easy it was for you. > > You're one of the x86 maintainers. > > And I think you're forgetting how hard these things are for a newbie. > I don't even know which one comes first of pmds and puds. > > Per-cpu page tables sounds about on the same scale of as, say, > rewriting the VM or some other major subsystem. Epic! > >
You might be able to pull off a simple implementation using paravirt_ops, without impacting the core VM.
Basically, you keep the current global pagetables, but never set them as real pagetables. Instead you keep per-cpu copies of these pagetables and sync them from the master pagetable as needed.
-- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
| |