All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>
Cc: KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	KVMARM <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] KVM: arm64: Use read/write spin lock for MMU protection
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2022 10:23:46 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bl0itvt9.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220110210441.2074798-2-jingzhangos@google.com>

On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 21:04:39 +0000,
Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com> wrote:
> 
> To reduce the contentions caused by MMU lock, some MMU operations can
> be performed under read lock.
> One improvement is to add a fast path for permission relaxation during
> dirty logging under the read lock.

This commit message really doesn't say what this patch does
(converting our MMU spinlock to a rwlock, and replacing all instances
of the lock being acquired with a write lock acquisition). Crucially,
it only mention the read lock which appears *nowhere* in this patch.

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>
Cc: KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, KVMARM <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
	Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>,
	Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] KVM: arm64: Use read/write spin lock for MMU protection
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2022 10:23:46 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bl0itvt9.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220110210441.2074798-2-jingzhangos@google.com>

On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 21:04:39 +0000,
Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com> wrote:
> 
> To reduce the contentions caused by MMU lock, some MMU operations can
> be performed under read lock.
> One improvement is to add a fast path for permission relaxation during
> dirty logging under the read lock.

This commit message really doesn't say what this patch does
(converting our MMU spinlock to a rwlock, and replacing all instances
of the lock being acquired with a write lock acquisition). Crucially,
it only mention the read lock which appears *nowhere* in this patch.

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.

  reply	other threads:[~2022-01-11 10:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-01-10 21:04 [RFC PATCH 0/3] ARM64: Guest performance improvement during dirty Jing Zhang
2022-01-10 21:04 ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-10 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] KVM: arm64: Use read/write spin lock for MMU protection Jing Zhang
2022-01-10 21:04   ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-11 10:23   ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2022-01-11 10:23     ` Marc Zyngier
2022-01-11 22:12     ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-11 22:12       ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-10 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] KVM: arm64: Add fast path to handle permission relaxation during dirty logging Jing Zhang
2022-01-10 21:04   ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-11 10:22   ` Marc Zyngier
2022-01-11 10:22     ` Marc Zyngier
2022-01-11 10:50   ` Marc Zyngier
2022-01-11 10:50     ` Marc Zyngier
2022-01-11 22:12     ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-11 22:12       ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-10 21:04 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] KVM: selftests: Add vgic initialization for dirty log perf test for ARM Jing Zhang
2022-01-10 21:04   ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-11  9:55   ` Andrew Jones
2022-01-11  9:55     ` Andrew Jones
2022-01-11 22:12     ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-11 22:12       ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-11 10:30   ` Marc Zyngier
2022-01-11 10:30     ` Marc Zyngier
2022-01-11 22:16     ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-11 22:16       ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-12 11:37       ` Marc Zyngier
2022-01-12 11:37         ` Marc Zyngier
2022-01-12 17:40         ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-12 17:40           ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-11 11:54 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] ARM64: Guest performance improvement during dirty Marc Zyngier
2022-01-11 11:54   ` Marc Zyngier
2022-01-11 22:12   ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-11 22:12     ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-13  2:49 ` Ricardo Koller
2022-01-13  2:49   ` Ricardo Koller
2022-01-13  3:50   ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-13  3:50     ` Jing Zhang
2022-01-13  6:12     ` Ricardo Koller
2022-01-13  6:12       ` Ricardo Koller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87bl0itvt9.wl-maz@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=dmatlack@google.com \
    --cc=jingzhangos@google.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.