On 27/05/20 09:48, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>
> My own question is whether this even makes any sense 10 years later.
> The HW has massively changed, and this adds a whole lot of complexity
> to both the hypervisor and the guest.
It still makes sense, but indeed it's for different reasons. One
On 2020-05-27 03:39, Gavin Shan wrote:
Hi Mark,
[...]
Can you run tests with a real workload? For example, a kernel build
inside the VM?
Yeah, I agree it's far from a realistic workload. However, it's the
test case
which was suggested when async page fault was proposed from day one,
Hi Mark,
On 5/26/20 11:09 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
At a high-level I'm rather fearful of this series. I can see many ways
that this can break, and I can also see that even if/when we get things
into a working state, constant vigilance will be requried for any
changes to the entry code.
I'm not
Hi Gavin,
At a high-level I'm rather fearful of this series. I can see many ways
that this can break, and I can also see that even if/when we get things
into a working state, constant vigilance will be requried for any
changes to the entry code.
I'm not keen on injecting non-architectural
On 5/8/20 1:29 PM, Gavin Shan wrote:
There are two stages of page faults and the stage one page fault is
handled by guest itself. The guest is trapped to host when the page
fault is caused by stage 2 page table, for example missing. The guest
is suspended until the requested page is populated.
There are two stages of page faults and the stage one page fault is
handled by guest itself. The guest is trapped to host when the page
fault is caused by stage 2 page table, for example missing. The guest
is suspended until the requested page is populated. There might be
IO activities involved
6 matches
Mail list logo
