From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Yang, Sheng" Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: Enable Virtual Processor Identification (VPID) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 16:34:16 +0800 Message-ID: <200801251634.16608.sheng.yang@intel.com> References: <200801241426.55928.sheng.yang@intel.com> <200801251501.54884.sheng.yang@intel.com> <479989C0.90307@qumranet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org To: Avi Kivity Return-path: In-Reply-To: <479989C0.90307-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Friday 25 January 2008 15:03:28 Avi Kivity wrote: > Yang, Sheng wrote: > > I think it's OK for there is a judgment in __invvpid() to see if machine > > has the ability(also if it is allowed to using VPID). :) > > Oh right, I missed that. > > We can remove it now since it will only be called if vpid != 0, and that > happens only on vpid enabled machines, no? Yes. I think we can replace vpid_sync_all() with vpid_sync_vcpu_all(), then there was no reference to vpid_sync_all() now... BTW: vpid_sync_all() can be used after VMX_ON, but just in case... So we may remove it for now. -- Thanks Yang, Sheng ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/