[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANRm+CyNOnCDEwAK04Yr_Yom3ebfKH61_3-fXaCs-LbcTiEd7w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 08:47:05 +0800
From: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Haiwei Li <lihaiwei@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] KVM: VMX: Introduce generic fastpath handler
On Tue, 28 Apr 2020 at 02:26, Sean Christopherson
<sean.j.christopherson@...el.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 02:22:40PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > From: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>
> >
> > Introduce generic fastpath handler to handle MSR fastpath, VMX-preemption
> > timer fastpath etc. In addition, we can't observe benefit from single
> > target IPI fastpath when APICv is disabled, let's just enable IPI and
> > Timer fastpath when APICv is enabled for now.
>
> There are three different changes being squished into a single patch:
>
> - Refactor code to add helper
> - Change !APICv behavior for WRMSR fastpath
> - Introduce EXIT_FASTPATH_CONT_RUN
>
> I don't think you necessarily need to break this into three separate
> patches, but's the !APICv change needs to be a standalone patch, especially
> given the shortlog. E.g. the refactoring could be introduced along with
> the second fastpath case, and CONT_RUN could be introduced with its first
> usage.
Agreed, will split to two separate patches.
Wanpeng
Powered by blists - more mailing lists