From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=PjNn=RI=vger.kernel.org=linux-kernel-owner@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07660C43381
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue,  5 Mar 2019 00:13:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67])
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEF1A20663
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue,  5 Mar 2019 00:13:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1726805AbfCEANs (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 4 Mar 2019 19:13:48 -0500
Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]:20023 "EHLO mga05.intel.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1726080AbfCEANs (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 4 Mar 2019 19:13:48 -0500
X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN
X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN
X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False
Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32])
  by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Mar 2019 16:13:48 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.58,441,1544515200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="325410165"
Received: from romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com ([172.25.110.60])
  by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 04 Mar 2019 16:13:47 -0800
Date:   Mon, 4 Mar 2019 16:06:54 -0800
From:   Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
To:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        H Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        x86 <x86@kernel.org>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/17] x86/split_lock: Enable #AC exception for split
 locked accesses
Message-ID: <20190305000653.GA233112@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com>
References: <1551494711-213533-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
 <20190304215505.GC30350@char.us.oracle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190304215505.GC30350@char.us.oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 04:55:05PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > This capability may also find usage in cloud. A user process with split
> > lock running in one guest can block other cores from accessing shared
> > memory during its split locked memory access. That may cause overall
> > system performance degradation.
> 
> "shared memory" ? As in memory shared between two guests?

Maybe I should remove the "shared" here.

Thanks.

-Fenghua