linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] x86/tlb: optimizing flush_tlb

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]

Date:	Tue, 15 May 2012 11:18:49 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Cc:	Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, arnd@...db.de,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, fweisbec@...il.com, jeremy@...p.org,
	riel@...hat.com, luto@....edu, avi@...hat.com, len.brown@...el.com,
	dhowells@...hat.com, fenghua.yu@...el.com, borislav.petkov@....com,
	yinghai@...nel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com, cpw@....com,
	steiner@....com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, penberg@...nel.org,
	hughd@...gle.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com,
	tj@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, jmorris@...ei.org,
	kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yongjie.ren@...el.com,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] x86/tlb: optimizing flush_tlb_mm

On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 19:15 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> So this should go to linux-arch...
> 
> On 15 May 2012 18:55, Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com> wrote:
> > Not every flush_tlb_mm execution moment is really need to evacuate all
> > TLB entries, like in munmap, just few 'invlpg' is better for whole
> > process performance, since it leaves most of TLB entries for later
> > accessing.
> >
> > This patch is changing flush_tlb_mm(mm) to flush_tlb_mm(mm, start, end)
> > in cases.
> 
> What happened with Peter's comment about using flush_tlb_range for this?
> 
> flush_tlb_mm() API should just stay unchanged AFAIKS.
> 
> Then you need to work out the best way to give range info to the tlb/mmu gather
> API. Possibly passing in the rage for that guy is OK, which x86 can
> then implement
> as flush range.

Right, most archs that have tlb_flush_range() do range tracking in
mmu_gather. Our TLB ops fully support that, there's absolutely no need
to go change the interface for thos.
--
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/