[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FB3E9FE.5020902@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 10:55:10 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
CC: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.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,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
yongjie.ren@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] x86/tlb: add tlb_flushall_shift for specific CPU
On 05/15/2012 11:49 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
> + if (!cpu_has_invlpg || vma->vm_flags & VM_HUGETLB
> + || tlb_flushall_shift == (u16)TLB_FLUSH_ALL) {
I asked for you to fold the cpu_has_invlpg test into tlb_flushall_shift.
Also, (u16)TLB_FLUSH_ALL really is hit up with the ugly stick... why on
earth is this u16? It's a bit shift, so it can't be bigger than 6 bits
anyway... and if you want to be able to use -1 as a sentinel you might
as well make it a signed value and use < 0 or == -1 as the test.
Am I missing something really fundamental here?
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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