[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrXmyZ0KwAHbYRwv=hO3nkgctjnb3z5tXvkQKkoABrKgHg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 08:16:58 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.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>,
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/11] x86/mm: Stop calling leave_mm() in idle code
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:22 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2017, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/idle/intel_idle.c b/drivers/idle/intel_idle.c
>> index 216d7ec88c0c..2ae43f59091d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/idle/intel_idle.c
>> +++ b/drivers/idle/intel_idle.c
>> @@ -912,16 +912,15 @@ static __cpuidle int intel_idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
>> struct cpuidle_state *state = &drv->states[index];
>> unsigned long eax = flg2MWAIT(state->flags);
>> unsigned int cstate;
>> - int cpu = smp_processor_id();
>>
>> cstate = (((eax) >> MWAIT_SUBSTATE_SIZE) & MWAIT_CSTATE_MASK) + 1;
>>
>> /*
>> - * leave_mm() to avoid costly and often unnecessary wakeups
>> - * for flushing the user TLB's associated with the active mm.
>> + * NB: if CPUIDLE_FLAG_TLB_FLUSHED is set, this idle transition
>> + * will probably flush the TLB. It's not guaranteed to flush
>> + * the TLB, though, so it's not clear that we can do anything
>> + * useful with this knowledge.
>
> So my understanding here is:
>
> The C-state transition might flush the TLB, when cstate->flags has
> CPUIDLE_FLAG_TLB_FLUSHED set. The idle transition already took the
> CPU out of the set of CPUs which are remotely flushed, so the
> knowledge about this potential flush is not useful for the kernels
> view of the TLB state.
Indeed. I assume the theory behind the old code was that leave_mm()
was expensive and that CPUIDLE_FLAG_TLB_FLUSHED would be a decent
heuristic for when to do it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists