From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: pbonzini@redhat.com (Paolo Bonzini) Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 18:57:24 +0100 Subject: [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/3] arm64: KVM: work around incoherency with uncached guest mappings In-Reply-To: <20150219175518.GB26965@hawk.usersys.redhat.com> References: <1424343286-6792-1-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> <20150219165731.GA26965@hawk.usersys.redhat.com> <20150219175518.GB26965@hawk.usersys.redhat.com> Message-ID: <54E62404.9040702@redhat.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 19/02/2015 18:55, Andrew Jones wrote: >> > > (I don't have an exact number for how many times it went to EL1 because >> > > access_mair() doesn't have a trace point.) >> > > (I got the 62873 number by testing a 3rd kernel build that only had patch >> > > 3/3 applied to the base, and counting kvm_toggle_cache events.) >> > > (The number 50 is the number of kvm_toggle_cache events *without* 3/3 >> > > applied.) >> > > >> > > I consider this bad news because, even considering it only goes to EL2, >> > > it goes a ton more than it used to. I realize patch 3/3 isn't the final >> > > plan for enabling traps though. If a full guest boots, can you try timing a kernel compile? Paolo