Re: KVM: guest: only batch user pte updates

Avi Kivity
2009-02-11T11:56:16Z

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>
>> Yes. It seems however that only set_pte_at/pte_update/_defer are
>> used under significatly long lazy mmu sections (long as in number of
>> updates). Is it worthwhile to bother (and risk) batching kernel pte
>> updates ?
>>
>
> Well, that depends on how expensive each update is. For something
> like kunmap atomic, I think combining the clear+tlb flush probably is
> worthwhile.

I agree, kmap_atomic() is fairly common.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function