> On Jun 25, 2019, at 2:40 PM, Dave Hansen <dave.han...@intel.com> wrote: > > On 6/12/19 11:48 PM, Nadav Amit wrote: >> Support the new interface of flush_tlb_multi, which also flushes the >> local CPU's TLB, instead of flush_tlb_others that does not. This >> interface is more performant since it parallelize remote and local TLB >> flushes. >> >> The actual implementation of flush_tlb_multi() is almost identical to >> that of flush_tlb_others(). > > This confused me a bit. I thought we didn't support paravirtualized > flush_tlb_multi() from reading earlier in the series. > > But, it seems like that might be Xen-only and doesn't apply to KVM and > paravirtualized KVM has no problem supporting flush_tlb_multi(). Is > that right? It might be good to include some of that background in the > changelog to set the context.
I’ll try to improve the change-logs a bit. There is no inherent reason for PV TLB-flushers not to implement their own flush_tlb_multi(). It is left for future work, and here are some reasons: 1. Hyper-V/Xen TLB-flushing code is not very simple 2. I don’t have a proper setup 3. I am lazy
