[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170512.125708.475573831936972365.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 12:57:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: pasha.tatashin@...cle.com
Cc: mhocko@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
borntraeger@...ibm.com, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [v3 0/9] parallelized "struct page" zeroing
From: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 16:59:33 -0400
> We should either keep memset() only for deferred struct pages as what
> I have in my patches.
>
> Another option is to add a new function struct_page_clear() which
> would default to memset() and to something else on platforms that
> decide to optimize it.
>
> On SPARC it would call STBIs, and we would do one membar call after
> all "struct pages" are initialized.
No membars will be performed for single individual page struct clear,
the cutoff to use the STBI is larger than that.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists