[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YxEP7ZBRIuFWhnYJ@google.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 20:02:53 +0000
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
Li RongQing <lirongqing@...du.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/19] KVM: SVM: Remove redundant cluster calculation
that also creates a shadow
On Wed, Aug 31, 2022, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 00:34 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Drop the redundant "cluster" calculation and its horrific shadowing in
> > the x2avic logical mode path. The "cluster" that is declared at an outer
> > scope is derived using the exact same calculation and has performed the
> > left-shift.
>
> Actually I think we should just revert the commit
> 'KVM: SVM: Use target APIC ID to complete x2AVIC IRQs when possible'
>
>
> I know that the patch that intially introduced the the avic_kick_target_vcpus_fast had
> x2apic/x2avic code, and then it was split to avoid adding x2avic code before it was merged,
> resulting in this patch to add the x2apic specific code.
>
> But when I fixed most issues of avic_kick_target_vcpus_fast in my
> 'KVM: x86: SVM: fix avic_kick_target_vcpus_fast', I added back x2apic code because
> it was just natural to do since I had to calculate cluster/bitmap masks anyway.
>
> I expected this patch to be dropped because of this but I guess it was not noticed,
> or patches were merged in the wrong order.
>
> This is the reason of shadowing, duplicate calculations/etc.
Ooooh, I completely missed that x2AVIC was already supported. I saw the code, but
between the fixing the first bug and unwinding everything everything else I didn't
see that the end result ended up being a full revert.
So yeah, a full revert is definitely in order.
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists