Re: [PATCH v9 1/3] x86/tlb: introduce a flush HVM ASIDs flag

[Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:06:23PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 14.04.2020 16:53, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:50:15PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 14.04.2020 13:19, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >>>>> I think this should work, but I would rather do it in a separate
> >>>>> patch.
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, just like the originally (wrongly, as you validly say) suggested
> >>>> full removal of them, putting this in a separate patch would indeed
> >>>> seem better.
> >>>
> >>> Would you like me to resend with the requested fix to
> >>> paging_log_dirty_range (ie: drop the FLUSH_TLB and only call
> >>> flush_mask for HAP guests running on AMD) then?
> >>
> >> Well, ideally I'd see that function also make use of the intended
> >> new helper function, if at all possible (and suitable).
> > 
> > Oh, OK. Just to make sure I understand what you are asking for, you
> > would like me to resend introducing the new guest_flush_tlb_mask
> > helper and use it in the flush_tlb_mask callers modified by this
> > patch?
> 
> Yes (and I now realize it may not make sense to split it off into a
> separate change).

I could do a pre-patch that introduces guest_flush_tlb_mask as a
simple wrapper around flush_tlb_mask and replace the callers that I
modify in this patch. Then this patch would only introduce
FLUSH_HVM_ASID_CORE and modify guest_flush_tlb_mask to use it when
required.

It might make it more complicated to see which callers require the
ASID flush, but if you think it's better I can arrange the patches in
that way.

Thanks, Roger.