[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170630124422.GA12077@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 13:44:22 +0100
From: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.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 v4 00/10] PCID and improved laziness
On Thu, 29 Jun, at 08:53:12AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> *** Ingo, even if this misses 4.13, please apply the first patch before
> *** the merge window.
>
> There are three performance benefits here:
>
> 1. TLB flushing is slow. (I.e. the flush itself takes a while.)
> This avoids many of them when switching tasks by using PCID. In
> a stupid little benchmark I did, it saves about 100ns on my laptop
> per context switch. I'll try to improve that benchmark.
>
> 2. Mms that have been used recently on a given CPU might get to keep
> their TLB entries alive across process switches with this patch
> set. TLB fills are pretty fast on modern CPUs, but they're even
> faster when they don't happen.
>
> 3. Lazy TLB is way better. We used to do two stupid things when we
> ran kernel threads: we'd send IPIs to flush user contexts on their
> CPUs and then we'd write to CR3 for no particular reason as an excuse
> to stop further IPIs. With this patch, we do neither.
Heads up, I'm gonna queue this for a run on SUSE's performance test
grid.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists