lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [Feb]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v12 18/20] KVM: pfncache: check the need for invalidation under read lock first
From
On Mon, Jan 15, 2024, Paul Durrant wrote:
> From: Paul Durrant <pdurrant@amazon.com>
>
> Taking a write lock on a pfncache will be disruptive if the cache is

*Unnecessarily* taking a write lock. Please save readers a bit of brain power
and explain that this is beneificial when there are _unrelated_ invalidation.

> heavily used (which only requires a read lock). Hence, in the MMU notifier
> callback, take read locks on caches to check for a match; only taking a
> write lock to actually perform an invalidation (after a another check).

This doesn't have any dependency on this series, does it? I.e. this should be
posted separately, and preferably with some performance data. Not having data
isn't a sticking point, but it would be nice to verify that this isn't a
pointless optimization.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-27 14:51    [W:0.070 / U:0.312 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site