From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49852) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b4oaa-0000Yk-Ls for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 May 2016 08:04:05 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b4oaU-0002YJ-9h for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 May 2016 08:04:03 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-x229.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c06::229]:33808) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b4oaU-0002Xe-2f for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 May 2016 08:03:58 -0400 Received: by mail-io0-x229.google.com with SMTP id 190so191858637iow.1 for ; Mon, 23 May 2016 05:03:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87a8jhdotl.fsf@linaro.org> References: <87a8jhdotl.fsf@linaro.org> From: alvise rigo Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 14:03:42 +0200 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Any topics for today's MTTCG sync-up call? List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?UTF-8?B?QWxleCBCZW5uw6ll?= Cc: MTTCG Devel , QEMU Developers , Mark Burton , =?UTF-8?B?S09OUkFEIEZyw6lkw6lyaWM=?= , Sergey Fedorov , "Emilio G. Cota" , Paolo Bonzini , Pranith Kumar Hi Alex, I finally solved the issue I had, the branch is working well as far as I can say. The work I will share, in addition to making the LL/SC work mttcg-aware, extends the various TLB flushes calls with the query-based mechanism: the requesting CPU queries the flushes to the target CPUs and wait them for completion. Sorry for the delay, I have been quite busy. I just need to polish some commits, than (this week) I will share the branch. Best regards, alvise On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Alex Benn=C3=A9e wrote: > Hi, > > It's been a while since the last sync-up call. Have we got any topics to > discuss today? > > Sergey and I (with a little Paolo) have spent some of last week delving > into the locking hierarchy w.r.t to tb_lock vs mmap_lock to see if there > is any simplification to be had. I'm not sure if this is a topic > conducive to a phone call instead of the mailing list but if others want > to discuss it we can add it as an agenda item. > > We also have a new member of the team. Pranith has joined as a GSoC > student. He'll be looking at memory ordering with his first pass at the > problem looking to solve the store-after-load issues which do show up on > ARM-on-x86 (see my testcase). > > Alvise, is there any help you need with the LL/SC stuff? The MTTCG aware > version has been taking some time so would it be worth sharing the > issues you have hit with the group? > > Emilio, is there anything you want to add? I've been following the QHT > stuff which is a really positive addition which my v3 base patches is > based upon (making the hot-path non lock contended). Do you have > anything in the works above that? > > Cheers, > > -- > Alex Benn=C3=A9e >