From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC5B8C3404C for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 17:11:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67E7A2464E for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 17:11:00 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 67E7A2464E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEFB54AF3A; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:10:59 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CxySNMXiQIMM; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:10:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8CCD4AF3C; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:10:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EC8B4AF3A for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:10:57 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Wxd88v7uDiGl for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:10:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96FD04AF2B for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:10:55 -0500 (EST) X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Feb 2020 09:10:53 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,456,1574150400"; d="scan'208";a="408131622" Received: from sjchrist-coffee.jf.intel.com (HELO linux.intel.com) ([10.54.74.202]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 18 Feb 2020 09:10:54 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 09:10:52 -0800 From: Sean Christopherson To: Vitaly Kuznetsov Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 15/19] KVM: Provide common implementation for generic dirty log functions Message-ID: <20200218171052.GE27565@linux.intel.com> References: <20200121223157.15263-16-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> <20200206200200.GC700495@xz-x1> <20200206212120.GF13067@linux.intel.com> <20200206214106.GG700495@xz-x1> <20200207194532.GK2401@linux.intel.com> <20200208001832.GA823968@xz-x1> <20200208004233.GA15581@linux.intel.com> <20200208005334.GB823968@xz-x1> <20200208012938.GC15581@linux.intel.com> <87sgj99q9w.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87sgj99q9w.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Cc: Wanpeng Li , kvm@vger.kernel.org, David Hildenbrand , linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Janosch Frank , Marc Zyngier , Joerg Roedel , Christian Borntraeger , kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Jim Mattson , Cornelia Huck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 04:39:39PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Sean Christopherson writes: > > Unless it's functionally incorrect (Vitaly?), going with option (2) and > > naming the hook kvm_arch_flush_remote_tlbs_memslot() seems like the obvious > > choice, e.g. the final cleanup gives this diff stat: > > (I apologize again for not replying in time) No worries, didn't hinder me in the slightest as I was buried in other stuff last week anyways. > I think this is a valid approach and your option (2) would also be my > choice. I also don't think there's going to be a problem when (if) > Hyper-V adds support for PML (eVMCSv2?). Cool, thanks! _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm