From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 12:02:56 +0100 Message-ID: <93c53d82-2b62-bb74-c472-8923bb2893aa@redhat.com> References: <1510192934-5369-1-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@hotmail.com> <1510192934-5369-3-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@hotmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , kvm , =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Wanpeng Li , Eduardo Valentin To: Wanpeng Li Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 09/11/2017 12:01, Wanpeng Li wrote: > 2017-11-09 18:48 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : >> On 09/11/2017 03:02, Wanpeng Li wrote: >>> @@ -484,6 +511,8 @@ void __init kvm_guest_init(void) >>> pv_time_ops.steal_clock = kvm_steal_clock; >>> } >>> >>> + pv_mmu_ops.flush_tlb_others = kvm_flush_tlb_others; >> >> This needs to be keyed on a new CPUID feature bit. Eduardo is also > > Will do. > >> adding a new "PV_DEDICATED" hint and you might disable PV TLB flush when >> PV_DEDICATED is set. > > Why disable PV TLB flush for PV_DEDICATED(qspinlock)? PV_DEDICATED says pretty much that it is very unlikely to have a preempted vCPU. Therefore, the cpumask loop is unnecessary. Paolo