[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130916163547.GF9326@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 18:35:47 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/50] mm: Do not flush TLB during protection change if
!pte_present && !migration_entry
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:31:57AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> NUMA PTE scanning is expensive both in terms of the scanning itself and
> the TLB flush if there are any updates. Currently non-present PTEs are
> accounted for as an update and incurring a TLB flush where it is only
> necessary for anonymous migration entries. This patch addresses the
> problem and should reduce TLB flushes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
> ---
> mm/mprotect.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mprotect.c b/mm/mprotect.c
> index 1f9b54b..1e9cef0 100644
> --- a/mm/mprotect.c
> +++ b/mm/mprotect.c
> @@ -109,8 +109,9 @@ static unsigned long change_pte_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
> make_migration_entry_read(&entry);
> set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte,
> swp_entry_to_pte(entry));
> +
> + pages++;
> }
> - pages++;
> }
> } while (pte++, addr += PAGE_SIZE, addr != end);
> arch_leave_lazy_mmu_mode();
Should we fold this into patch 7 ?
--
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