[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ee587bd6-a06f-8a38-9182-94218f7d08bb@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 12:53:33 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 6/6] KVM: x86: Switch KVM guest to using interrupts
for page ready APF delivery
On 29/04/20 11:36, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> +
> + if (__this_cpu_read(apf_reason.enabled)) {
> + reason = __this_cpu_read(apf_reason.reason);
> + if (reason == KVM_PV_REASON_PAGE_READY) {
> + token = __this_cpu_read(apf_reason.token);
> + /*
> + * Make sure we read 'token' before we reset
> + * 'reason' or it can get lost.
> + */
> + mb();
> + __this_cpu_write(apf_reason.reason, 0);
> + kvm_async_pf_task_wake(token);
> + }
If tokens cannot be zero, could we avoid using reason for the page ready
interrupt (and ultimately retire "reason" completely)?
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists