Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: arm64: Parallel access faults

Marc Zyngier
2022-11-30T16:54:41Z

On Tue, 29 Nov 2022 19:19:42 +0000,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> When I implemented the parallel faults series I was mostly focused on
> improving the performance of 8.1+ implementations which bring us
> FEAT_HAFDBS. In so doing, I failed to put access faults on the read side
> of the MMU lock.
>
> Anyhow, this small series adds support for handling access faults in
> parallel, piling on top of the infrastructure from the first parallel
> faults series. As most large systems I'm aware of are 8.1+ anyway, I
> don't expect this series to provide significant uplift beyond some
> oddball machines Marc has lying around. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to
> have a D05 to play with too...

Hey, that puts the whole fruity range of machines in the oddball
department too, as they don't implement any of HAFDBS!

The feature being optional, I wouldn't be surprised if others would
either not implement it (or disable it to hide that it is b0rk3n...).

M.

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