On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 14:07:14 +0200
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> It goes like:
>
> CPU0CPU1
>
> unhook page
> cli
> traverse page tables
> TLB invalidate --->
> sti
>
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 03:07:29PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 11/08/17 14:54, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 02:46:41PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> >> Aah, okay. Now I understand the problem. The TLB isn't the issue but the
> >> IPI is serving two purposes here: TLB flush
On 11/08/17 14:54, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 02:46:41PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> Aah, okay. Now I understand the problem. The TLB isn't the issue but the
>> IPI is serving two purposes here: TLB flushing (which is allowed to
>> happen at any time) and serialization regar
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 02:46:41PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> Aah, okay. Now I understand the problem. The TLB isn't the issue but the
> IPI is serving two purposes here: TLB flushing (which is allowed to
> happen at any time) and serialization regarding access to critical pages
> (which seems t
On 11/08/17 14:35, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 02:22:25PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> Wait - the TLB can be cleared at any time, as Andrew was pointing out.
>> No cpu can rely on an address being accessible just because IF is being
>> cleared. All that matters is the existing
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 02:22:25PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> Wait - the TLB can be cleared at any time, as Andrew was pointing out.
> No cpu can rely on an address being accessible just because IF is being
> cleared. All that matters is the existing and valid page table entry.
>
> So clearing
On 11/08/17 12:56, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:23:10AM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Peter Zijlstra writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 07:08:22PM +, Jork Loeser wrote:
>>>
>> Subject: Re: [tip:x86/platform] x86/hyper-v: Use hypercall for remote
>> TLB fl
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:05:45PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >> Oh, I see your concern. Hyper-V, however, is not the first x86
> >> hypervisor trying to avoid IPIs on remote TLB flush, Xen does this
> >> too. Briefly looking at xen_flush_tlb_others() I don't see anything
> >> special, do we kno
On 11/08/17 11:56, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:23:10AM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Peter Zijlstra writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 07:08:22PM +, Jork Loeser wrote:
>>>
>> Subject: Re: [tip:x86/platform] x86/hyper-v: Use hypercall for remote
>> TLB fl
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:23:10AM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra writes:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 07:08:22PM +, Jork Loeser wrote:
> >
> >> > > Subject: Re: [tip:x86/platform] x86/hyper-v: Use hypercall for remote
> >> > > TLB flush
> >>
> >> > > Hold on.. if we don't
10 matches
Mail list logo
