From: Tangnianyao <tangnianyao@huawei.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, <oupton@kernel.org>,
<joey.gouly@arm.com>, <seiden@linux.ibm.com>,
<suzuki.poulose@arm.com>, <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
<catalin.marinas@arm.com>, <will@kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <kvmarm@lists.linux.dev>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "guoyang (C)" <guoyang2@huawei.com>,
"huanglingyan (A)" <huanglingyan2@huawei.com>,
"Wangzhou (B)" <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>
Subject: Question about the "TLBs and I-cache are private to each vCPU" guarantee with VTTBR_EL2.CnP
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2026 15:45:56 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e85b957d-c8bc-aac0-b413-03441d05c3df@huawei.com> (raw)
Hi, all
I'm trying to understand the TLB and I-cache invalidation in
`kvm_arch_vcpu_load()` that is intended to "guarantee that both TLBs and
I-cache are private to each vCPU".
As I understand it, when `VTTBR_EL2.CnP == 1`, `__kvm_flush_cpu_context()`
only performs a local TLB and I-cache invalidation, which does not seem
sufficient to guarantee that property.
In fact, even if the invalidation were extended to the Inner Shareable
domain, it still seems difficult to guarantee “TLBs and I-cache are
private to each vCPU”, when `VTTBR_EL2.CnP == 1`, as long as multiple
vCPUs from the same VM may be running concurrently on different PEs.
So I have two questions:
1. What is the rationale behind the comment that "guarantee that both TLBs
and I-cache are private to each vCPU"?
2. Should the effect of `VTTBR_EL2.CnP` be taken into account when
reasoning about this guarantee?
Thanks
Nianyao Tang
next reply other threads:[~2026-07-04 7:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-04 7:45 Tangnianyao [this message]
2026-07-05 17:28 ` Question about the "TLBs and I-cache are private to each vCPU" guarantee with VTTBR_EL2.CnP Wei-Lin Chang
2026-07-06 3:30 ` Tangnianyao
2026-07-06 7:25 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-07-06 8:25 ` Tangnianyao
2026-07-06 8:44 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-07-06 14:15 ` Tangnianyao
2026-07-06 15:18 ` Will Deacon
2026-07-06 15:33 ` Mark Rutland
2026-07-07 2:41 ` Tangnianyao
2026-07-07 6:36 ` Oliver Upton
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=e85b957d-c8bc-aac0-b413-03441d05c3df@huawei.com \
--to=tangnianyao@huawei.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=guoyang2@huawei.com \
--cc=huanglingyan2@huawei.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=seiden@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=wangzhou1@hisilicon.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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