From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Dominik Dingel <dingel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>,
Xiantao Zhang <xiantao.zhang@intel.com>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] PF: Provide additional direct page notification
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 12:45:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <13B3500B-18A9-4B97-8C85-597BEAFC9250@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130710104253.GQ24941@redhat.com>
On 10.07.2013, at 12:42, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:39:01PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 09.07.2013, at 18:01, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/07/13 15:56, Dominik Dingel wrote:
>>>> By setting a Kconfig option, the architecture can control when
>>>> guest notifications will be presented by the apf backend.
>>>> So there is the default batch mechanism, working as before, where the vcpu thread
>>>> should pull in this information. On the other hand there is now the direct
>>>> mechanism, this will directly push the information to the guest.
>>>>
>>>> Still the vcpu thread should call check_completion to cleanup leftovers,
>>>> that leaves most of the common code untouched.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dominik Dingel <dingel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
>>> for the "why". We want to use the existing architectured interface.
>>
>> Shouldn't this be a runtime option?
>>
> Why? What is the advantage of using sync delivery when HW can do it
> async?
What's the advantage of having an option at all then? Who selects it?
Alex
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Dominik Dingel <dingel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>,
Xiantao Zhang <xiantao.zhang@intel.com>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] PF: Provide additional direct page notification
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 12:45:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <13B3500B-18A9-4B97-8C85-597BEAFC9250@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130710104253.GQ24941@redhat.com>
On 10.07.2013, at 12:42, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:39:01PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 09.07.2013, at 18:01, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/07/13 15:56, Dominik Dingel wrote:
>>>> By setting a Kconfig option, the architecture can control when
>>>> guest notifications will be presented by the apf backend.
>>>> So there is the default batch mechanism, working as before, where the vcpu thread
>>>> should pull in this information. On the other hand there is now the direct
>>>> mechanism, this will directly push the information to the guest.
>>>>
>>>> Still the vcpu thread should call check_completion to cleanup leftovers,
>>>> that leaves most of the common code untouched.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dominik Dingel <dingel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
>>> for the "why". We want to use the existing architectured interface.
>>
>> Shouldn't this be a runtime option?
>>
> Why? What is the advantage of using sync delivery when HW can do it
> async?
What's the advantage of having an option at all then? Who selects it?
Alex
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-10 10:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-09 13:56 [PATCH v3 0/4] Enable async page faults on s390 Dominik Dingel
2013-07-09 13:56 ` Dominik Dingel
2013-07-09 13:56 ` [PATCH 1/4] PF: Add FAULT_FLAG_RETRY_NOWAIT for guest fault Dominik Dingel
2013-07-09 13:56 ` Dominik Dingel
2013-07-09 15:23 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-09 15:23 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-09 15:36 ` Christian Borntraeger
2013-07-09 15:36 ` Christian Borntraeger
2013-07-09 15:43 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-09 15:43 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-09 13:56 ` [PATCH 2/4] PF: Make KVM_HVA_ERR_BAD usable on s390 Dominik Dingel
2013-07-09 13:56 ` Dominik Dingel
2013-07-09 15:38 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-09 15:38 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-09 13:56 ` [PATCH 3/4] PF: Provide additional direct page notification Dominik Dingel
2013-07-09 13:56 ` Dominik Dingel
2013-07-09 16:01 ` Christian Borntraeger
2013-07-09 16:01 ` Christian Borntraeger
2013-07-10 10:39 ` Alexander Graf
2013-07-10 10:39 ` Alexander Graf
2013-07-10 10:42 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-10 10:42 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-10 10:45 ` Alexander Graf [this message]
2013-07-10 10:45 ` Alexander Graf
2013-07-10 10:48 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-10 10:48 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-10 10:52 ` Alexander Graf
2013-07-10 10:52 ` Alexander Graf
2013-07-10 10:49 ` Christian Borntraeger
2013-07-10 10:49 ` Christian Borntraeger
2013-07-10 10:51 ` Alexander Graf
2013-07-10 10:51 ` Alexander Graf
2013-07-09 13:56 ` [PATCH 4/4] PF: Async page fault support on s390 Dominik Dingel
2013-07-09 13:56 ` Dominik Dingel
2013-07-10 8:18 ` Christian Borntraeger
2013-07-10 8:18 ` Christian Borntraeger
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-07-10 12:59 [PATCH v4 0/4] Enable async page faults " Dominik Dingel
2013-07-10 12:59 ` [PATCH 3/4] PF: Provide additional direct page notification Dominik Dingel
2013-07-10 12:59 ` Dominik Dingel
2013-07-05 20:55 [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Enable async page faults on s390 Dominik Dingel
2013-07-05 20:55 ` [PATCH 3/4] PF: Provide additional direct page notification Dominik Dingel
2013-07-05 20:55 ` Dominik Dingel
2013-07-07 9:28 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-07 9:28 ` Gleb Natapov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=13B3500B-18A9-4B97-8C85-597BEAFC9250@suse.de \
--to=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=christoffer.dall@linaro.org \
--cc=cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
--cc=dingel@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=xiantao.zhang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.