linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 02/12] KVM: arm64: Use kvm_arch_flush_remote

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJHc60xAUVt5fbhEkOqeC-VF8SWVOt3si=1yxVVAUW=+Hu_wNg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 2 Aug 2023 16:28:52 -0700
From:   Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@...gle.com>
To:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
        Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com>,
        Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
        Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>,
        Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@...gle.com>,
        Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@...gle.com>,
        Colton Lewis <coltonlewis@...gle.com>,
        David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 02/12] KVM: arm64: Use kvm_arch_flush_remote_tlbs()

Sure, I'll change it to kvm_arch_flush_vm_tlbs() in v8.

Thanks,
Raghavendra

On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 8:55 AM Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 22:50:07 +0100,
> Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > On Sat, 22 Jul 2023 03:22:41 +0100,
> > > Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@...gle.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Stop depending on CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_ARCH_TLB_FLUSH_ALL and opt to
> > > > standardize on kvm_arch_flush_remote_tlbs() since it avoids
> > > > duplicating the generic TLB stats across architectures that implement
> > > > their own remote TLB flush.
> > > >
> > > > This adds an extra function call to the ARM64 kvm_flush_remote_tlbs()
> > > > path, but that is a small cost in comparison to flushing remote TLBs.
> > >
> > > Well, there is no such thing as a "remote TLB" anyway. We either have
> > > a non-shareable or inner-shareable invalidation. The notion of remote
> > > would imply that we track who potentially has a TLB, which we
> > > obviously don't.
> >
> > Maybe kvm_arch_flush_vm_tlbs()?  The "remote" part is misleading even on x86 when
> > running on Hyper-V, as the flush may be done via a single hypercall and by kicking
> > "remote" vCPUs.
>
> Yup, this would be much better.
>
> Thanks,
>
>         M.
>
> --
> Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.