lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 RESEND 3/5] KVM: x86: hyperv: use get_vcpu_by_vpidx() in kvm_hv_flush_tlb()
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 06:55:28PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 24/09/2018 18:24, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > Hi Paolo,
> >
> > could you please clarify what needs to be done to get this merged? In
> > particular, are you OK with my comment above or do we need to do
> > something with it (e.g. get back to the 'logarythmic search' from v2)?
> >
> > In kvm/queue I can see only 'x86/hyper-v: rename ipi_arg_{ex,non_ex}
> > structures' patch from this series applied.
>
> Hi,
>
> my plan was to apply only 1/2/5 for now. I singled out the rename patch
> because that one could be included in 4.19-rc kernels as a cleanup.

Is this supposed to mean you're not happy with the approach taken in
Vitaly's patch? Can you explain why? I take my part of guilt for it so
I'd like to know, too.

Speaking of the options we have, the choice depends on the assumptions
we take. (And I guess when you spoke of quadratic complexity you
referred to the algorithm to convert the vp_index mask into the KVM cpu
mask.)

If we can assume that in all relevant cases vp_index coincides with the
cpu index (which I think we can) then Vitaly's approach is the most
efficient.

If, on the opposite, we want to optimize for random mapping between
vp_index and cpu index, then it's probably better instead to iterate
over vcpus and test if their vp_index belongs to the requested mask.

Neither of the above is quadratic.

Dunno if we need to specifically consider intermediate situations.

Anyway using a havier vp_index -> cpu index translation looks like an
overkill to me.

What do you think?

Thanks,
Roman.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-25 10:59    [W:0.110 / U:1.384 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site