VMware patches for Ubuntu

Alok Kataria akataria at vmware.com
Fri Nov 7 18:40:28 GMT 2008


On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 18:33 -0800, Tim Gardner wrote:
> > 
> > Commit id's are
> > 
> > commit b2bcc7b299f37037b4a78dc1538e5d6508ae8110
> > commit 49ab56ac6e1b907b7dadb72a4012460359feaf0e
> > commit 88b094fb8d4fe43b7025ea8d487059e8813e02cd
> > commit eca0cd028bdf0f6aaceb0d023e9c7501079a7dda
> > commit 395628ef4ea12ff0748099f145363b5e33c69acb
> > commit 6bdbfe99916398dbb28d83833cc04757110f2738
> > commit fd8cd7e1919fc1c27fe2fdccd2a1cd32f791ef0f
> > 
> > These patches are discussed mainly on this thread,
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/10/22/523
> > 
> > Let me know if you have any questions.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Alok
> > 
> 
> I'm quite reluctant to apply these patches to an LTS kernel without your
> assurance that they've been well tested on 2.4.24. 

You mean 2.6.24 here...yes i had done some testing for the Ubuntu kernel
but this was quite early when the patch looked quite different than the
final version. 
So i think i will have to backport these for the 2.6.24 tree (which
doesn't have merged tsc code), but anyways doing that (backport) and
testing it should be trivial, i will do that and send you the backported
patches soon.

Just to clarify, you agree that the testing required is only for guests
running under VMware, while running natively it should have no side
affect apart from the execution of detection code.

> How about 2.6.27?

Yep these patches have been tested against 2.6.27 mainline, so we should
be good for intrepid i guess.

One thing that has come up while discussing these patches with the
distribution folks, these patches add a field to the x86_cpuinfo
structure, so it may mean breaking the kABI, i can add a global
x86_hyper_vendor variable instead of the per-cpu one if that's needed. 
Also please let me know if there are any other tests that i should run
to check that no other changes break the kABI for ubuntu.

Thanks,
Alok

> 
> rtg




More information about the kernel-team mailing list