From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yuzhao@google.com,
oliver.upton@linux.dev, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>,
Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] KVM: arm64: Using rcu_read_lock() for kvm_pgtable_stage2_mkyoung()
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2023 08:44:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878rctnkqg.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230608220558.39094-4-ctshao@google.com>
On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 23:05:41 +0100,
Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@google.com> wrote:
>
> Access bit is RCU safe and can be set without taking kvm->mmu_lock().
Please explain why. What happens when the page tables are *not* RCU
controlled, such as in the pKVM case?
> Replacing existing kvm->mmu_lock() with rcu_read_lock() for better
> performance.
Please define "better performance", quote workloads, figures, HW setup
and point to a reproducer. Please add a cover letter to your patch
series explaining the context this happens in.
Also, I'm getting increasingly annoyed by the lack of coordination
between seamingly overlapping patch series (this, Yu's, Anish's and
Vipin's), all from a single company.
Surely you can talk to each other and devise a coordinated approach?
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-09 7:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-08 22:05 [PATCH v1 1/3] KVM: arm64: Consistently use free_removed_table() for stage-2 Chun-Tse Shao
2023-06-08 22:05 ` [PATCH v1 2/3] KVM: arm64: Only initiate walk if page_count() > 1 in free_removed_table() Chun-Tse Shao
2023-06-08 22:05 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] KVM: arm64: Using rcu_read_lock() for kvm_pgtable_stage2_mkyoung() Chun-Tse Shao
2023-06-09 7:44 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2023-06-09 22:58 ` Chun-Tse Shao
2023-06-09 14:51 ` Oliver Upton
2023-06-08 22:13 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] KVM: arm64: Consistently use free_removed_table() for stage-2 Yu Zhao
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=878rctnkqg.wl-maz@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=bgardon@google.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=ctshao@google.com \
--cc=gshan@redhat.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
--cc=yuzhao@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).