[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b750f917-3049-7bb9-11b6-0d9980f8f1e6@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 17:16:49 +0800
From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alex Shi <alex.shi@...aro.org>,
Tomoki Sekiyama <tomoki.sekiyama.qu@...achi.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/irq: do not substract irq_tlb_count from
irq_call_count
On 08/11/2016 05:13 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com> wrote:
>
>> This is found by LKP's cyclic performance regression tracking recently
>> with the vm-scalability test suite. I have bisected to commit
>> 0a7ce4b5a632 ("mm/rmap: share the i_mmap_rwsem"). This commit didn't do
>> anything wrong but revealed the irq_call_count problem. IIUC, the commit
>> makes rwc->remap_one in rmap_walk_file concurrent with multiple threads.
>> When remap_one is try_to_unmap_one, then multiple threads could queue
>> flush tlb to the same CPU but only one IPI will be sent.
>
> Note, for some reason the commit ID you used is wrong, the real one is:
Oops, I looked at a test branch where I cherry-picked that commit, sorry.
>
> 3dec0ba0be6a ("mm/rmap: share the i_mmap_rwsem")
>
> I have fixed this in the changelog.
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists