[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FE9BB7B.2050009@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:39:07 -0500
From: Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: konrad@...nok.org
CC: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Robert Jennings <rcj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86: add local_tlb_flush_kernel_range()
On 06/25/2012 06:01 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Seth Jennings
> <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> This patch adds support for a local_tlb_flush_kernel_range()
>> function for the x86 arch. This function allows for CPU-local
>> TLB flushing, potentially using invlpg for single entry flushing,
>> using an arch independent function name.
>
> What x86 hardware did you use to figure the optimal number?
Actually I didn't. I used Alex Shi's numbers.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/25/39
"Like some machine in my hands, balance points is 16 entries
on Romely-EP; while it is at 8 entries on Bloomfield NHM-EP;
and is 256 on IVB mobile CPU. but on model 15 core2 Xeon
using invlpg has nothing help.
For untested machine, do a conservative optimization, same
as NHM CPU."
--
Seth
--
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