[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4623F3EF.9040406@vmware.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 15:08:47 -0700
From: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
CC: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm] i386: use pte_update_defer in ptep_test_and_clear_{dirty,young}
David Rientjes wrote:
> Sure, but what I really like about the patch is that we're only flushing
> something if !flush_end in the first place. So we can eliminate any TLB
> flushing if that VMA didn't need it; that's a change from the current
> behavior. And since the most obvious use-case for /proc/pid/clear_refs is
> in conjunction with /proc/pid/smaps for approximating memory footprint,
> we'll end up saving TLB flushes because the granularity with which that
> measurement is taken is usually very fine.
>
> Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
>
I like the patch even better if you still batch the flushes, but keep
the !flush_end machinery. If I read it correctly, flush_start stays at
the lower bound for the whole function, so it is still accurate later.
And with the flush outside the spinlock, contention time is lower.
Thanks,
Zach
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists