[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1197584859.15741.185.camel@pasglop>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:27:39 +1100
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Asit Mallick <asit.k.mallick@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: What was the problem with quicklists and x86-64?
On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 13:33 -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> >
> > Ah ok, so that's a NUMA issue due to how the quicklists are
> implemented,
> > I see. Note that the flush isn't necessary a solution on all
> platforms.
> > On powerpc, I -still- need to defer with RCU as we don't do anything
> in
> > flush tlb. Our TLB invalidations are HW broadcast in the first
> place,
> > but what we need to sync with is the SW hash reload code.
> >
> > So your solution in the quicklists doesn't solve the problem for us.
>
> No this may mean that the problem does not exist on powerpc since it
> seems to be okay to free pages before all processors have flushed the
> TLBs? Or are you deferrring the freeing of the pages via RCU?
I'm deferring the freeing with RCU.
Ben.
--
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