On Thu, Jul 27, 2023, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jul 2023 03:22:41 +0100,
Raghavendra Rao Ananta [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Stop depending on CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_ARCH_TLB_FLUSH_ALL and opt to
standardize on kvm_arch_flush_remote_tlbs() since it avoids
duplicating the generic TLB stats across architectures that implement
their own remote TLB flush.
This adds an extra function call to the ARM64 kvm_flush_remote_tlbs()
path, but that is a small cost in comparison to flushing remote TLBs.
Well, there is no such thing as a "remote TLB" anyway. We either have
a non-shareable or inner-shareable invalidation. The notion of remote
would imply that we track who potentially has a TLB, which we
obviously don't.
Maybe kvm_arch_flush_vm_tlbs()? The "remote" part is misleading even on x86 when
running on Hyper-V, as the flush may be done via a single hypercall and by kicking
"remote" vCPUs.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel