[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <93c53d82-2b62-bb74-c472-8923bb2893aa@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 12:02:56 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>,
Eduardo Valentin <eduval@...zon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush
On 09/11/2017 12:01, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> 2017-11-09 18:48 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>:
>> On 09/11/2017 03:02, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>> @@ -484,6 +511,8 @@ void __init kvm_guest_init(void)
>>> pv_time_ops.steal_clock = kvm_steal_clock;
>>> }
>>>
>>> + pv_mmu_ops.flush_tlb_others = kvm_flush_tlb_others;
>>
>> This needs to be keyed on a new CPUID feature bit. Eduardo is also
>
> Will do.
>
>> adding a new "PV_DEDICATED" hint and you might disable PV TLB flush when
>> PV_DEDICATED is set.
>
> Why disable PV TLB flush for PV_DEDICATED(qspinlock)?
PV_DEDICATED says pretty much that it is very unlikely to have a
preempted vCPU. Therefore, the cpumask loop is unnecessary.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists