Re: [PATCH v8 1/3] x86/tlb: introduce a flush HVM ASIDs flag

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 01.04.2020 09:15, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 08:34:23AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 31.03.2020 18:45, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 05:40:59PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 20.03.2020 19:42, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>>>>> @@ -993,7 +993,7 @@ static void shadow_blow_tables(struct domain *d)
>>>>>                                 
>>>>> pagetable_get_mfn(v->arch.shadow_table[i]), 0);
>>>>>  
>>>>>      /* Make sure everyone sees the unshadowings */
>>>>> -    flush_tlb_mask(d->dirty_cpumask);
>>>>> +    flush_mask(d->dirty_cpumask, FLUSH_TLB | FLUSH_HVM_ASID_CORE);
>>>>
>>>> Taking this as example, wouldn't it be more consistent overall if
>>>> paths not being HVM-only would specify FLUSH_HVM_ASID_CORE only
>>>> for HVM domains?
> 
> I could introduce something specific for shadow:
> 
> sh_flush_tlb_mask(d, m) \
>     flush_mask(m, FLUSH_TLB | (is_hvm_domain(d) ? FLUSH_HVM_ASID_CORE : 0))

This looks good.

> And likely a similar macro for hap, that uses hap_enabled.

And then there's no point to use it anywhere in hap.c, as that code
runs only when hap_enabled is true. Hence my suggestion to simply
drop FLUSH_TLB there (assuming by "similar" you meant making
FLUSH_TLB conditional there).

Jan