From: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
To: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, npiggin@gmail.com,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Add support for H_RPT_INVALIDATE (nested case only)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 17:05:59 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201214060559.GH4717@yekko.fritz.box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201211103336.GB775394@in.ibm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1457 bytes --]
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 04:03:36PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:56:41PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> > Implements H_RPT_INVALIDATE hcall and supports only nested case
> > currently.
> >
> > A KVM capability KVM_CAP_RPT_INVALIDATE is added to indicate the
> > support for this hcall.
>
> As Paul mentioned in the thread, this hcall does both process scoped
> invalidations and partition scoped invalidations for L2 guest.
> I am adding KVM_CAP_RPT_INVALIDATE capability with only partition
> scoped invalidations (nested case) implemented in the hcall as we
> don't see the need for KVM to implement process scoped invalidation
> function as KVM may never run with LPCR[GTSE]=0.
>
> I am wondering if enabling the capability with only partial
> implementation of the hcall is the correct thing to do. In future
> if we ever want process scoped invalidations support in this hcall,
> we may not be able to differentiate the availability of two functions
> cleanly from QEMU.
Yeah, it's not ideal.
> So does it make sense to implement the process scoped invalidation
> function also now itself even if it is not going to be used in
> KVM?
That might be a good idea, if it's not excessively difficult.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-14 9:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-19 11:26 [PATCH v1 0/2] Use H_RPT_INVALIDATE for nested guest Bharata B Rao
2020-10-19 11:26 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Add support for H_RPT_INVALIDATE (nested case only) Bharata B Rao
2020-12-09 4:15 ` Paul Mackerras
2020-12-10 4:24 ` Bharata B Rao
2020-12-11 1:16 ` David Gibson
2020-12-11 5:27 ` Paul Mackerras
2020-12-14 6:05 ` David Gibson
2020-12-11 10:33 ` Bharata B Rao
2020-12-14 6:05 ` David Gibson [this message]
2020-10-19 11:26 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Use H_RPT_INVALIDATE in nested KVM Bharata B Rao
2020-11-24 9:44 ` [PATCH v1 0/2] Use H_RPT_INVALIDATE for nested guest Bharata B Rao
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=20201214060559.GH4717@yekko.fritz.box \
--to=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bharata@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.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).