search for: jeson

Hello Jeson, On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 04:50:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > Just to make sure I understand here. For boosting through huge TLB, do > you mean we can do that in the future (e.g by mapping more userspace > pages to kenrel) or it can be done by this series (only about three 4K > pag...

Hello Jeson, On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 04:50:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > Just to make sure I understand here. For boosting through huge TLB, do > you mean we can do that in the future (e.g by mapping more userspace > pages to kenrel) or it can be done by this series (only about three 4K > pag...

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 03:40:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2019/3/9 ??3:48, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > Hello Jeson, > > > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 04:50:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > Just to make sure I understand here. For boosting through huge TLB, do > > > you mean we can do that in the future (e.g by mapping more userspace > > > pages to kenrel) or it can be do...

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 03:40:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2019/3/9 ??3:48, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > Hello Jeson, > > > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 04:50:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > Just to make sure I understand here. For boosting through huge TLB, do > > > you mean we can do that in the future (e.g by mapping more userspace > > > pages to kenrel) or it can be do...

On 2019/3/9 ??3:48, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > Hello Jeson, > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 04:50:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> Just to make sure I understand here. For boosting through huge TLB, do >> you mean we can do that in the future (e.g by mapping more userspace >> pages to kenrel) or it can be done by this series (only about...

...t; Basicly from mmu notifier callback you have the same right as zap > pte has. Good point. Related to this I already was wondering why the set_page_dirty is not done in the invalidate. Reading the patch it looks like the dirty is marked dirty when the ring wraps around, not in the invalidate, Jeson can tell if I misread something there. For transient data passing through the ring, nobody should care if it's lost. It's not user-journaled anyway so it could hit the disk in any order. The only reason to flush it to do disk is if there's memory pressure (to pageout like a swapout) an...

On 2019/3/11 ??8:48, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 03:40:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> On 2019/3/9 ??3:48, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: >>> Hello Jeson, >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 04:50:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >>>> Just to make sure I understand here. For boosting through huge TLB, do >>>> you mean we can do that in the future (e.g by mapping more userspace >>>> pages to kenrel) or i...

On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 02:38:38PM -0500, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 02:09:10PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote: > > I thought this patch was only for anonymous memory ie not file back ? > > Yes, the other common usages are on hugetlbfs/tmpfs that also don't > need to implement writeback and are obviously safe too. > > > If so then set dirty is

On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 02:38:38PM -0500, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 02:09:10PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote: > > I thought this patch was only for anonymous memory ie not file back ? > > Yes, the other common usages are on hugetlbfs/tmpfs that also don't > need to implement writeback and are obviously safe too. > > > If so then set dirty is

On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 10:52:15AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2019/3/11 ??8:48, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 03:40:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > On 2019/3/9 ??3:48, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > > Hello Jeson, > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 04:50:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > > > Just to make sure I understand here. For boosting through huge TLB, do > > > > > you mean we can do that in the future (e.g by mapping more userspace > &g...

...r callback you have the same right as zap >> pte has. > Good point. > > Related to this I already was wondering why the set_page_dirty is not > done in the invalidate. Reading the patch it looks like the dirty is > marked dirty when the ring wraps around, not in the invalidate, Jeson > can tell if I misread something there. Actually not wrapping around,? the pages for used ring was marked as dirty after a round of virtqueue processing when we're sure vhost wrote something there. Thanks > > For transient data passing through the ring, nobody should care if &g...

...r callback you have the same right as zap >> pte has. > Good point. > > Related to this I already was wondering why the set_page_dirty is not > done in the invalidate. Reading the patch it looks like the dirty is > marked dirty when the ring wraps around, not in the invalidate, Jeson > can tell if I misread something there. Actually not wrapping around,? the pages for used ring was marked as dirty after a round of virtqueue processing when we're sure vhost wrote something there. Thanks > > For transient data passing through the ring, nobody should care if &g...

On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 12:56:45PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 10:47:22AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 02:18:12AM -0500, Jason Wang wrote: > > > +static const struct mmu_notifier_ops vhost_mmu_notifier_ops = { > > > + .invalidate_range = vhost_invalidate_range, > > > +}; > > > + > >

On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 12:56:45PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 10:47:22AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 02:18:12AM -0500, Jason Wang wrote: > > > +static const struct mmu_notifier_ops vhost_mmu_notifier_ops = { > > > + .invalidate_range = vhost_invalidate_range, > > > +}; > > > + > >