Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

2017-11-08 18:02-0800, Wanpeng Li: > From: Wanpeng Li > > Remote flushing api's does a busy wait which is fine in bare-metal > scenario. But with-in the guest, the vcpus might have been pre-empted > or blocked. In this scenario, the initator vcpu would end up >

Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

2017-11-08 18:02-0800, Wanpeng Li: > From: Wanpeng Li > > Remote flushing api's does a busy wait which is fine in bare-metal > scenario. But with-in the guest, the vcpus might have been pre-empted > or blocked. In this scenario, the initator vcpu would end up > busy-waiting for a long amount of

Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

2017-11-09 19:02 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : > On 09/11/2017 12:01, Wanpeng Li wrote: >> 2017-11-09 18:48 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : >>> On 09/11/2017 03:02, Wanpeng Li wrote: @@ -484,6 +511,8 @@ void __init kvm_guest_init(void)

Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

2017-11-09 19:02 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : > On 09/11/2017 12:01, Wanpeng Li wrote: >> 2017-11-09 18:48 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : >>> On 09/11/2017 03:02, Wanpeng Li wrote: @@ -484,6 +511,8 @@ void __init kvm_guest_init(void) pv_time_ops.steal_clock = kvm_steal_clock;

Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

On 09/11/2017 12:01, Wanpeng Li wrote: > 2017-11-09 18:48 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : >> On 09/11/2017 03:02, Wanpeng Li wrote: >>> @@ -484,6 +511,8 @@ void __init kvm_guest_init(void) >>> pv_time_ops.steal_clock = kvm_steal_clock; >>> } >>> >>> +

Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

On 09/11/2017 12:01, Wanpeng Li wrote: > 2017-11-09 18:48 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : >> On 09/11/2017 03:02, Wanpeng Li wrote: >>> @@ -484,6 +511,8 @@ void __init kvm_guest_init(void) >>> pv_time_ops.steal_clock = kvm_steal_clock; >>> } >>> >>> + pv_mmu_ops.flush_tlb_others

Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

2017-11-09 18:48 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : > On 09/11/2017 03:02, Wanpeng Li wrote: >> From: Wanpeng Li >> >> Remote flushing api's does a busy wait which is fine in bare-metal >> scenario. But with-in the guest, the vcpus might have been pre-empted >>

Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

2017-11-09 18:48 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : > On 09/11/2017 03:02, Wanpeng Li wrote: >> From: Wanpeng Li >> >> Remote flushing api's does a busy wait which is fine in bare-metal >> scenario. But with-in the guest, the vcpus might have been pre-empted >> or blocked. In this scenario, the initator

Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

On 09/11/2017 03:02, Wanpeng Li wrote: > From: Wanpeng Li > > Remote flushing api's does a busy wait which is fine in bare-metal > scenario. But with-in the guest, the vcpus might have been pre-empted > or blocked. In this scenario, the initator vcpu would end up >

Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

On 09/11/2017 03:02, Wanpeng Li wrote: > From: Wanpeng Li > > Remote flushing api's does a busy wait which is fine in bare-metal > scenario. But with-in the guest, the vcpus might have been pre-empted > or blocked. In this scenario, the initator vcpu would end up > busy-waiting for a long amount

[PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

From: Wanpeng Li Remote flushing api's does a busy wait which is fine in bare-metal scenario. But with-in the guest, the vcpus might have been pre-empted or blocked. In this scenario, the initator vcpu would end up busy-waiting for a long amount of time. This patch set

[PATCH RESEND 2/3] KVM: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

From: Wanpeng Li Remote flushing api's does a busy wait which is fine in bare-metal scenario. But with-in the guest, the vcpus might have been pre-empted or blocked. In this scenario, the initator vcpu would end up busy-waiting for a long amount of time. This patch set implements para-virt