Il 26/08/2014 10:28, Christian Borntraeger ha scritto: > 2. We use KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH instead of open coding tlb flushes Why is this needed? It seems slower than what you are replacing. Supporting KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH is useful (the first hunk of the patch); hiding the control block manipulation behind a function would also be good. However, x86 needs the KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH for local flushes only because Intel wants you to flush on the CPU where the VM will next run. It would not be necessary on AMD for example. So if you do not need it on s390, you do not have to do it. Paolo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
