[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180925101040.GA2336@rkaganb.sw.ru>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 13:10:41 +0300
From: Roman Kagan <rkagan@...tuozzo.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
"K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
"Michael Kelley (EOSG)" <Michael.H.Kelley@...rosoft.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 RESEND 3/5] KVM: x86: hyperv: use get_vcpu_by_vpidx()
in kvm_hv_flush_tlb()
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 11:29:57AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 25/09/2018 10:57, Roman Kagan wrote:
> > If we can assume that in all relevant cases vp_index coincides with the
> > cpu index (which I think we can) then Vitaly's approach is the most
> > efficient.
> >
> > If, on the opposite, we want to optimize for random mapping between
> > vp_index and cpu index, then it's probably better instead to iterate
> > over vcpus and test if their vp_index belongs to the requested mask.
>
> Yes, that would work too. Perhaps we can do both? You can have a
> kvm->num_mismatched_vp_indexes count to choose between the two.
Makes sense to me.
Roman.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists