On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 01:56:17PM +0900, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
(2012/02/14 13:36), Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
BTW, do you think that kvm_mmu_flush_tlb() should be moved inside of the
mmu_lock critical section?
Ah, forget about this. Trivially no.
Yes the reason is that it's the local
(Sorry for the delay, I was in bad form this weekend.)
I am sorry, I see what I was misreading.
My eyes misread kvm_mmu_flush_tlb() as kvm_flush_remote_tlbs().
That's why I could not understand what you said, really sorry.
(2012/02/10 16:42), Xiao Guangrong wrote:
It is obvious wrong, i do
(2012/02/14 13:36), Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
BTW, do you think that kvm_mmu_flush_tlb() should be moved inside of the
mmu_lock critical section?
Ah, forget about this. Trivially no.
I really need to take a rest.
Sorry,
Takuya
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
This function's TLB flush was moved sometimes in the past:
1.
commit 4539b35881ae9664b0e2953438dd83f5ee02c0b4
KVM: Fix missing smp tlb flush in invlpg
inserted it in the critical section.
2.
commit 505aef8f30a95f7e4abf2c07e54ded1521587ba0
KVM: MMU: cleanup FNAME(invlpg)
moved it inside
On 02/10/2012 02:29 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h
index 1561028..69d06f5 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h
@@ -682,6 +682,7 @@ static void FNAME(invlpg)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gva_t
(2012/02/10 15:55), Xiao Guangrong wrote:
On 02/10/2012 02:29 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h
index 1561028..69d06f5 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h
@@ -682,6 +682,7 @@ static void
On 02/10/2012 03:21 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
(2012/02/10 15:55), Xiao Guangrong wrote:
On 02/10/2012 02:29 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h
index 1561028..69d06f5 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h
+++
