linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4FFD79E2.3080307@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:34:34 +0530
From:	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
CC:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	S390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
	Carsten Otte <cotte@...ibm.com>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	chegu vinod <chegu_vinod@...com>,
	"Andrew M. Theurer" <habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 <x86@...nel.org>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>, linux390@...ibm.com,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <srivatsa.vaddagiri@...il.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>,
	Christian Ehrhardt <ehrhardt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler

On 07/11/2012 05:21 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
> On 07/11/2012 03:47 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>> On 11/07/12 11:06, Avi Kivity wrote:
[...]
>>>> So there is no win here, but there are other cases were diag44 is
>>>> used, e.g. cpu_relax.
>>>> I have to double check with others, if these cases are critical, but
>>>> for now, it seems
>>>> that your dummy implementation for s390 is just fine. After all it
>>>> is a no-op until
>>>> we implement something.
>>>
>>> Does the data structure make sense for you? If so we can move it to
>>> common code (and manage it in kvm_vcpu_on_spin()). We can guard it with
>>> CONFIG_KVM_HAVE_CPU_RELAX_INTERCEPT or something, so other archs don't
>>> have to pay anything.
>>
>> Ignoring the name, yes the data structure itself seems based on the
>> algorithm
>> and not on arch specific things. That should work.
>
> Ok. can you please elaborate, on the flow.
>

Ok got it..  Will check how the code can be common to both x86 and s390.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/