From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33915)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1Zft4J-0000yc-Fs
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 26 Sep 2015 13:15:28 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1Zft4G-0005XP-Ap
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 26 Sep 2015 13:15:27 -0400
Received: from mail-pa0-x233.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::233]:33206)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1Zft4G-0005WK-5B
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 26 Sep 2015 13:15:24 -0400
Received: by pacex6 with SMTP id ex6so134267561pac.0
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Richard Henderson <rth7680@gmail.com>
References: <1443083566-10994-1-git-send-email-a.rigo@virtualopensystems.com>
	<1443083566-10994-2-git-send-email-a.rigo@virtualopensystems.com>
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Message-ID: <5606D2A8.10501@twiddle.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:15:20 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1443083566-10994-2-git-send-email-a.rigo@virtualopensystems.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC v5 1/6] exec.c: Add new exclusive bitmap to
 ram_list
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Alvise Rigo <a.rigo@virtualopensystems.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mttcg@greensocs.com
Cc: claudio.fontana@huawei.com, jani.kokkonen@huawei.com, tech@virtualopensystems.com, alex.bennee@linaro.org, pbonzini@redhat.com

On 09/24/2015 01:32 AM, Alvise Rigo wrote:
> +    if (cpu == smp_cpus) {
> +        if (smp_cpus >= EXCL_BITMAP_CELL_SZ) {
> +            return bitmap[EXCL_BITMAP_GET_BYTE_OFFSET(addr)];
> +        } else {
> +            return bitmap[EXCL_BITMAP_GET_BYTE_OFFSET(addr)] &
> +                                            ((1 << smp_cpus) - 1);
> +        }
> +    } else {
> +        return bitmap[EXCL_BITMAP_GET_BYTE_OFFSET(addr)] & (1 << EXCL_IDX(cpu));
> +    }

How can more than one cpu have the same address exclusively?

Isn't this scheme giving a whole page to a cpu, not a cacheline?
That's going to cause ll/sc conflicts where real hardware wouldn't.



r~