[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1337076027.27694.13.camel@twins>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 12:00:27 +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 19:52 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> It could be warranted to change tlb_flush_mmu to a range API to
> avoid doing the per-entry tracking which those architectures do?
The per-entry could result in a much smaller range, there's no point in
flushing tlbs for unpopulated pages.
Anyway, I don't think even think we'd need to change the API for that,
you could track the entire range through tlb_start_vma() if you wanted
(although nobody does that IIRC).
--
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