Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] paravirt: rename paravirt_enabled to paravirt_legacy

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:07:13PM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> OK so here's a wiki to keep track of progress of the difference uses:
>>
>> http://kernelnewbies.org/KernelProjects/remove-paravirt-enabled
>>
>> It seems we have a resolution one way or another for all except for
>> the use on arch/x86/mm/dump_pagetables.c, is that right?
>
> Why not?
>
> I think we should simply check the range as ffff800000000000 -
> ffff87ffffffffff is practically an ABI and nothing should be mapped
> there anyway. No need for paravirt_enabled() there either.

Provided someone on the xen side acks, then great! We'd have full
coverage to remove all uses soon and kill paravirt_enabled() for good.
It may take some time to run tests of this to get a full sense of
correctness but perhaps in the future it may be easier if 0-day gets
some basic Xen tests (or embraces the Xen test suite) as was discussed
as possible a while ago. lguest may need some basic tests too, but I'm
not even sure what type of tests we'd run against lguest.

 Luis