From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37894)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alex.bennee@linaro.org>) id 1aJ2O7-0007DA-UB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:05:44 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alex.bennee@linaro.org>) id 1aJ2O2-0007sD-VA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:05:43 -0500
Received: from mail-wm0-x22a.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::22a]:33280)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alex.bennee@linaro.org>) id 1aJ2O2-0007rz-OR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:05:38 -0500
Received: by mail-wm0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id f206so262592875wmf.0
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:05:38 -0800 (PST)
References: <87r3hx6040.fsf@linaro.org> <5695081C.1070101@greensocs.com>
	<87vb6yde8g.fsf@linaro.org> <5695196E.70902@redhat.com>
	<87twmidbdb.fsf@linaro.org> <569527A0.5080502@redhat.com>
	<87si22dah3.fsf@linaro.org> <56952D38.40109@redhat.com>
From: Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
In-reply-to: <56952D38.40109@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:05:35 +0000
Message-ID: <87pox6d8yo.fsf@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] MTTCG sync-up call today?
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: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: mttcg@greensocs.com, Mark Burton <mark@greensocs.com>, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@gnu.org>, alvise rigo <a.rigo@virtualopensystems.com>, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, KONRAD Frederic <fred.konrad@greensocs.com>


Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> writes:

> On 12/01/2016 17:32, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>> I need to look at the branch...  The latest version I have here does
>>> not require tb_lock taken in tb_invalidate_phys_range.
>>
>> The tb_locks asserts where added in Fred's branch which makes sense as
>> we are going to mess with the translation block cache. Looking more
>> closely at tb_invalidate_phys_page_range I see it jumps through some
>> hoops when cpu == current_cpu == NULL.
>
> Does tb_invalidate_phys_page_range not take tb_lock itself?

You are right, I missed that when looking at the original code. I think
Fred was trying to push some of the locks up in his WIP branch causing
these problems.

I'll wait until his more complete branch is out.

>
> Paolo


--
Alex Bennée