On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 02:11:48PM -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote: > My thinking is to take it slow and get the patch in in its current state, > since it improves x86. Then as a next step, look into why the arm64 tlb > flushes are that expensive and look into optimizing that. On arm64 I am > testing on a 4.9 kernel so I'm wondering there are any optimizations since > 4.9 that can help speed it up there. After that, if all else fails about > speeding up arm64, then I look into developing the cleanest possible solution > where we can keep the lock held for longer and flush lesser. We rewrote a good chunk of the arm64 TLB invalidation and core mmu_gather code this merge window, so please do have another look at -rc1! Will _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
