[PATCH 00/18] KVM: Consolidate and optimize MMU notifiers · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 01/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Coalesce TDP MMU TLB flushes when zapping collapsible SPTEs · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 02/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Move flushing for "slot" handlers to caller for legacy MMU · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 03/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Coalesce TLB flushes when zapping collapsible SPTEs · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 05/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Pass address space ID to __kvm_tdp_mmu_zap_gfn_range() · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 04/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Coalesce TLB flushes across address spaces for gfn range zap · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 07/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Use leaf-only loop for walking TDP SPTEs when changing SPTE · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 06/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Pass address space ID to TDP MMU root walkers · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 08/18] KVM: Move prototypes for MMU notifier callbacks to generic code · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 09/18] KVM: Move arm64's MMU notifier trace events to generic code · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 12/18] KVM: MIPS/MMU: Convert to the gfn-based MMU notifier callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
Re: [PATCH 12/18] KVM: MIPS/MMU: Convert to the gfn-based MMU notifier callbacks · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31
[PATCH 10/18] KVM: Move x86's MMU notifier memslot walkers to generic code · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
Re: [PATCH 10/18] KVM: Move x86's MMU notifier memslot walkers to generic code · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 10/18] KVM: Move x86's MMU notifier memslot walkers to generic code · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 10/18] KVM: Move x86's MMU notifier memslot walkers to generic code · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31
[PATCH 11/18] KVM: arm64: Convert to the gfn-based MMU notifier callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 14/18] KVM: Kill off the old hva-based MMU notifier callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 13/18] KVM: PPC: Convert to the gfn-based MMU notifier callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 15/18] KVM: Take mmu_lock when handling MMU notifier iff the hva hits a memslot · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 18/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Drop trace_kvm_age_page() tracepoint · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
[PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31
[PATCH 17/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Allow yielding during MMU notifier unmap/zap, if possible · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-26
Re: [PATCH 00/18] KVM: Consolidate and optimize MMU notifiers · Ben Gardon <hidden> · 2021-03-30
Re: [PATCH 00/18] KVM: Consolidate and optimize MMU notifiers · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-30
Re: [PATCH 00/18] KVM: Consolidate and optimize MMU notifiers · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-03-30
Re: [PATCH 00/18] KVM: Consolidate and optimize MMU notifiers · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 00/18] KVM: Consolidate and optimize MMU notifiers · Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> · 2021-03-31
Re: [PATCH 00/18] KVM: Consolidate and optimize MMU notifiers · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-03-31

Re: [PATCH 00/18] KVM: Consolidate and optimize MMU notifiers

From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Date: 2021-03-31 09:34:56
Also in: kvm, kvmarm, linux-mips, lkml

On 2021-03-31 08:57, Paolo Bonzini wrote:

Queued and 1-9 and 18, thanks.  There's a small issue in patch 10 that
prevented me from committing 10-15, but they mostly look good.

Can you please push the resulting merge somewhere?

I'm concerned that it will conflict in interesting way with other stuff
that is on its way on the arm64 side, not to mentiobn that this hasn't
been tested at all on anything but x86 (and given the series was posted
on Friday, that's a bit of a short notice).

Thanks,

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

`h`	back out one level
`j`	next message in thread
`k`	previous message in thread
`l`	drill in
`Esc`	close help / fold thread tree
`?`	toggle this help