> From: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, December 2, 2021 4:48 PM
> 
> On 01.12.2021 14:02, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > On 01/12/2021 09:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
> >> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
> >> @@ -591,7 +591,8 @@ static int __must_check iommu_flush_all(
> >>      bool_t flush_dev_iotlb;
> >>      int rc = 0;
> >>
> >> -    flush_all_cache();
> >> +    flush_local(FLUSH_CACHE);
> >
> > While I agree that the conversion is an improvement, the logic still
> > looks totally bogus.
> >
> > I can believe that it might have been a stopgap to fix problems before
> > we identified the need for sync_cache() for non-coherent IOMMUs, but
> > there's no need I can spot for any WBINVDs on any of these paths.
> >
> > I'm fairly sure this should just be dropped, and Xen will get faster as
> > a result.
> 
> Kevin, thoughts? I have to admit I'm hesitant to remove such code, when
> there's no clear indication why it's there. I'm also not sure how much
> of a win the dropping would be, considering the places where this
> function gets called from.
> 

me too. Could Andrew elaborate further on "fairly sure" part?

Thanks
Kevin

Reply via email to