[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d36207ef-a4b3-24ef-40e4-9e6a22b092cb@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 08:34:58 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bpetkov@...e.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 03/10] x86/mm: Make the batched unmap TLB flush API more
generic
On 05/07/2017 05:38 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
> index f6838015810f..2e568c82f477 100644
> --- a/mm/rmap.c
> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
> @@ -579,25 +579,12 @@ void page_unlock_anon_vma_read(struct anon_vma *anon_vma)
> void try_to_unmap_flush(void)
> {
> struct tlbflush_unmap_batch *tlb_ubc = ¤t->tlb_ubc;
> - int cpu;
>
> if (!tlb_ubc->flush_required)
> return;
>
> - cpu = get_cpu();
> -
> - if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &tlb_ubc->cpumask)) {
> - count_vm_tlb_event(NR_TLB_LOCAL_FLUSH_ALL);
> - local_flush_tlb();
> - trace_tlb_flush(TLB_LOCAL_SHOOTDOWN, TLB_FLUSH_ALL);
> - }
> -
> - if (cpumask_any_but(&tlb_ubc->cpumask, cpu) < nr_cpu_ids)
> - flush_tlb_others(&tlb_ubc->cpumask, NULL, 0, TLB_FLUSH_ALL);
> - cpumask_clear(&tlb_ubc->cpumask);
> tlb_ubc->flush_required = false;
> tlb_ubc->writable = false;
> - put_cpu();
> }
>
> /* Flush iff there are potentially writable TLB entries that can race with IO */
> @@ -613,7 +600,7 @@ static void set_tlb_ubc_flush_pending(struct mm_struct *mm, bool writable)
> {
> struct tlbflush_unmap_batch *tlb_ubc = ¤t->tlb_ubc;
>
> - cpumask_or(&tlb_ubc->cpumask, &tlb_ubc->cpumask, mm_cpumask(mm));
> + arch_tlbbatch_add_mm(&tlb_ubc->arch, mm);
> tlb_ubc->flush_required = true;
>
> /*
Looking at this patch in isolation, how can this be safe? It removes
TLB flushes from the generic code. Do other patches in the series fix
this up?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists