linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2]x86: spread tlb flush vector between nodes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20101020120619.GD20124@basil.fritz.box>
Date:	Wed, 20 Oct 2010 14:06:19 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2]x86: spread tlb flush vector between nodes

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 01:20:52PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 09:31 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Really a lot of the per CPU scaling we have today should be per core
> > or per node to avoid explosion. 
> 
> Shouldn't that be per-cache instead of per-core?

That's the same on modern x86:

per core = per L1/L2 cache
per node = per L3 cache

-Andi

-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/