On Thu, 2022-04-14 at 15:19 +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH_CURRENT is an even stronger operation than
> KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH_GUEST so KVM_REQ_HV_TLB_FLUSH needs not to be
> processed after it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index e5aec386d299..d3839e648ab3 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -3357,8 +3357,11 @@ static inline void kvm_vcpu_flush_tlb_current(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> */
> void kvm_service_local_tlb_flush_requests(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> - if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH_CURRENT, vcpu))
> + if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH_CURRENT, vcpu)) {
> kvm_vcpu_flush_tlb_current(vcpu);
> + if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_HV_TLB_FLUSH, vcpu))
> + kvm_hv_vcpu_empty_flush_tlb(vcpu);
> + }
>
> if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH_GUEST, vcpu)) {
> kvm_vcpu_flush_tlb_guest(vcpu);
I think that this patch should be moved near patch 1 and/or even squished with it.
Best regards,
Maxim Levitsky
