linux-mips.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
	Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
	Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
	Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
	Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] KVM: Add a common API for range-based TLB invalidation
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 00:51:33 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y9B9FZReDVwdNNrS@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y9B8A+/FSPCrAANT@google.com>

On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 12:46:59AM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2023, David Matlack wrote:
> > This series introduces a common API for performing range-based TLB
> > invalidation. This is then used to supplant
> > kvm_arch_flush_remote_tlbs_memslot() and pave the way for two other
> > patch series:
> > 
> > 1. https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20230109215347.3119271-1-rananta@google.com/
> > 
> >   Adds ARM support for range-based TLB invalidation and needs a
> >   mechanism to invoke it from common code. This series provides such a
> >   mechanism via kvm_arch_flush_remote_tlbs_range().
> > 
> > 2. https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20221208193857.4090582-1-dmatlack@google.com/
> > 
> >   Refactors the TDP MMU into common code, which requires an API for
> >   range-based TLB invaliation.
> > 
> > This series is based on patches 29-33 from (2.), but I made some further
> > cleanups after looking at it a second time.
> > 
> > Tested on x86_64 and ARM64 using KVM selftests.
> 
> Did a quick read through, didn't see anything I disagree with.

LGTM for the tiny amount of arm64 changes, though I imagine David will
do a v2 to completely get rid of the affected Kconfig.

> Is there any urgency to getting this merged?  If not, due to the dependencies
> with x86 stuff queued for 6.3, and because of the cross-architecture changes, it
> might be easiest to plan on landing this in 6.4.  That would allow Paolo to create
> an immutable topic branch fairly early on.

+1, that buys us some time to go through the rounds on the arm64 side
such that we could possibly stack the TLBIRANGE work on top.

--
Thanks,
Oliver

  reply	other threads:[~2023-01-25  0:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-19 17:35 [PATCH 0/7] KVM: Add a common API for range-based TLB invalidation David Matlack
2023-01-19 17:35 ` [PATCH 1/7] KVM: Rename kvm_arch_flush_remote_tlb() to kvm_arch_flush_remote_tlbs() David Matlack
2023-01-19 17:35 ` [PATCH 2/7] KVM: arm64: Use kvm_arch_flush_remote_tlbs() David Matlack
2023-01-24 17:17   ` Oliver Upton
2023-01-24 17:28     ` David Matlack
2023-01-19 17:35 ` [PATCH 3/7] KVM: x86/mmu: Collapse kvm_flush_remote_tlbs_with_{range,address}() together David Matlack
2023-01-19 17:35 ` [PATCH 4/7] KVM: x86/mmu: Rename kvm_flush_remote_tlbs_with_address() David Matlack
2023-01-19 18:17   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-01-19 18:26     ` David Matlack
2023-01-19 17:35 ` [PATCH 5/7] KVM: x86/MMU: Use gfn_t in kvm_flush_remote_tlbs_range() David Matlack
2023-01-19 17:35 ` [PATCH 6/7] KVM: Allow range-based TLB invalidation from common code David Matlack
2023-01-24 17:17   ` Oliver Upton
2023-01-19 17:35 ` [PATCH 7/7] KVM: Move kvm_arch_flush_remote_tlbs_memslot() to " David Matlack
2023-01-25  0:46 ` [PATCH 0/7] KVM: Add a common API for range-based TLB invalidation Sean Christopherson
2023-01-25  0:51   ` Oliver Upton [this message]
2023-01-25 17:21     ` David Matlack

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=Y9B9FZReDVwdNNrS@google.com \
    --to=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
    --cc=aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com \
    --cc=anup@brainfault.org \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=atishp@atishpatra.org \
    --cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
    --cc=dmatlack@google.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rananta@google.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).