Liu Yu wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: kvm-ppc-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:kvm-ppc-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hollis Blanchard
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 2:55 AM
To: avi@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: kvm-ppc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [PATCH 4 of 5] kvm: ppc: Write only modified shadow
entries into theTLB on exit
@@ -229,6 +235,7 @@ void kvmppc_mmu_priv_switch(struct kvm_v
kvmppc_44x_shadow_release(vcpu, i);
stlbe->word0 = 0;
+ kvmppc_tlbe_set_modified(vcpu, i);
KVMTRACE_5D(STLB_INVAL, vcpu, i,
stlbe->tid, stlbe->word0, stlbe->word1,
stlbe->word2, handler);
Can this place use "_tlbia()" instead?
Hi Liu,
when we exit&reenter a guest on the lightweight path this patch saves us
from rebuilding too much of the tlb.
It's just the point of the patch to not invalidate all tlb entries on
every exit, but keeping as much as possible.
Additionally I'm not even sure if tlbia is available on all cores used.
Am I overlooking something ? - what do you think would be the benefit of
using _tlbia() here?
Do you mean the loop to clear up to the hwater mark where this patch
makes changes and not this patch itself?
--
Grüsse / regards,
Christian Ehrhardt
IBM Linux Technology Center, Open Virtualization
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
