Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1291307
| From | Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/x86/pvh: Use HVM's flush_tlb_others op |
| Date | 2015-12-14 17:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qFDHz-86S-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qF2I2-ZP-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <qFDod-7ZC-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <qFDod-7ZC-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 12/14/2015 10:35 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > El 14/12/15 a les 16.27, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk ha escrit: >> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 07:25:55PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>> Using MMUEXT_TLB_FLUSH_MULTI doesn't buy us much since the hypervisor >>> will likely perform same IPIs as would have the guest. >>> >> But if the VCPU is asleep, doing it via the hypervisor will save us waking >> up the guest VCPU, sending an IPI - just to do an TLB flush >> of that CPU. Which is pointless as the CPU hadn't been running the >> guest in the first place. OK, I then mis-read the hypervisor code, I didn't realize that vcpumask_to_pcpumask() takes into account vcpu_dirty_cpumask. >> >>> More importantly, using MMUEXT_INVLPG_MULTI may not to invalidate the >>> guest's address on remote CPU (when, for example, VCPU from another >>> guest >>> is running there). >> Right, so the hypervisor won't even send an IPI there. >> >> But if you do it via the normal guest IPI mechanism (which are opaque >> to the hypervisor) you and up scheduling the guest VCPU to do >> send an hypervisor callback. And the callback will go the IPI routine >> which will do an TLB flush. Not necessary. >> >> This is all in case of oversubscription of course. In the case where >> we are fine on vCPU resources it does not matter. >> >> Perhaps if we have PV aware TLB flush it could do this differently? > Why don't HVM/PVH just uses the HVMOP_flush_tlbs hypercall? It doesn't take any parameters so it will invalidate TLBs for all VCPUs, which is more than is being asked for. Especially in the case of MMUEXT_INVLPG_MULTI. (That's in addition to the fact that it currently doesn't work for PVH as it has a test for is_hvm_domain() instead of has_hvm_container_domain()). -boris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] xen/x86/pvh: Use HVM's flush_tlb_others op Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> - 2015-12-13 01:30 +0100
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/x86/pvh: Use HVM's flush_tlb_others op David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com> - 2015-12-14 15:00 +0100
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/x86/pvh: Use HVM's flush_tlb_others op Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> - 2015-12-14 15:10 +0100
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/x86/pvh: Use HVM's flush_tlb_others op Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com> - 2015-12-14 16:40 +0100
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/x86/pvh: Use HVM's flush_tlb_others op Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> - 2015-12-14 17:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] xen/x86/pvh: Use HVM's flush_tlb_others op Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> - 2015-12-15 15:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] xen/x86/pvh: Use HVM's flush_tlb_others op "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> - 2015-12-15 16:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH] xen/x86/pvh: Use HVM's flush_tlb_others op Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> - 2015-12-15 16:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] xen/x86/pvh: Use HVM's flush_tlb_others op "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> - 2015-12-15 16:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] xen/x86/pvh: Use HVM's flush_tlb_others op Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> - 2015-12-15 16:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] xen/x86/pvh: Use HVM's flush_tlb_others op "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> - 2015-12-15 17:10 +0100
csiph-web