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 12:52:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <A0CAE7A6-9615-4513-B4F3-35D394D2E32B@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130710104843.GS24941@redhat.com>
On 10.07.2013, at 12:48, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:45:59PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> 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?
>>
> x86 is stupid and cannot deliver the even asynchronously. Platform that
> can do it select the option.
We're in generic code. S390x enables it. X86 does not. That was the missing link!
Thanks a lot and sorry for the fuss :).
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 10:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ 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 ` [PATCH 1/4] PF: Add FAULT_FLAG_RETRY_NOWAIT for guest fault Dominik Dingel
2013-07-09 15:23 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-09 15:36 ` Christian Borntraeger
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 15:38 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-09 13:56 ` [PATCH 3/4] PF: Provide additional direct page notification Dominik Dingel
2013-07-09 16:01 ` Christian Borntraeger
2013-07-10 10:39 ` Alexander Graf
2013-07-10 10:42 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-10 10:45 ` Alexander Graf
2013-07-10 10:48 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-10 10:52 ` Alexander Graf [this message]
2013-07-10 10:49 ` Christian Borntraeger
2013-07-10 10:51 ` Alexander Graf
2013-07-09 13:56 ` [PATCH 4/4] PF: Async page fault support on s390 Dominik Dingel
2013-07-10 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
2013-07-05 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
2013-07-07 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=A0CAE7A6-9615-4513-B4F3-35D394D2E32B@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox