This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] TLB flushing in blktap kernel driver?

To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] TLB flushing in blktap kernel driver?
From: "Andrew Warfield" <andrew.warfield@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 13:57:20 -0700
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Julian Chesterfield <jac90@xxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 13:57:41 -0700
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=Hhcey095ZYu6H0Fo/+fJjiZM5kKu84Aobkoi3OvFvEP+UPhAV1XISzEH0xu41r1LY5OXEoyEE2PsAuzevi4Sic4twR+qQEzIG3AZWXBjhyfzdvLOW6o4lBZqLb1wXOkLvs0DVQWvOePIQj//0G4DxlqoPS/lZDOi4FZhYqu5tcs=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1159364024.6276.7.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <C1403B6C.1B5C%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <1159364024.6276.7.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Agreed -- not sure why that's there, possibly from before the days of
grant tables.  I agree that it can go though.  good catch.


On 9/27/06, Stephen C. Tweedie <sct@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 14:30 +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:
> > However, I can't understand right now why we need the tlb flush here.
> > If we're doing any grant table operations between dom0 and domU, then
> > the HV should be doing the tlb flushes for us, shouldn't it?  And mere
> > SMP synchronisation on a ring buffer requires a physical memory barrier,
> > not a TLB synchronisation (and RING_PUSH_REQUESTS already does a wmb.)
> Grant unmapping certainly guarantees to flush TLB entries.

Right.  I can't see why a simple ring buffer poll would *ever* need to
flush tlbs.  I may be missing something, which is why I asked, but it
looks like this was perhaps just intended to be a memory barrier, in
which case the flush call is entirely superfluous (and a significant
performance hit to boot.)


Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>