[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180823184648.0439a473@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 18:46:48 +1000
From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, luto@...nel.org, x86@...nel.org,
bp@...en8.de, will.deacon@....com, riel@...riel.com,
jannh@...gle.com, ascannell@...gle.com, dave.hansen@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm/tlb, x86/mm: Support invalidating TLB caches for
RCU_TABLE_FREE
On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 17:30:15 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> Jann reported that x86 was missing required TLB invalidates when he
> hit the !*batch slow path in tlb_remove_table().
>
> This is indeed the case; RCU_TABLE_FREE does not provide TLB (cache)
> invalidates, the PowerPC-hash where this code originated and the
> Sparc-hash where this was subsequently used did not need that. ARM
> which later used this put an explicit TLB invalidate in their
> __p*_free_tlb() functions, and PowerPC-radix followed that example.
So this is interesting, I _think_ a145abf12c did fix this bug for
powerpc, but then it seem to have been re-broken by a46cc7a90f
because that one defers the flush back to tlb_flush time. There
was quite a lot of churn getting the radix MMU off the ground at
that point though so I'm not 100% sure.
But AFAIKS powerpc today has this same breakage, and this patch
should fix it.
I have a couple of patches that touch the same code I'll send, you
might have some opinions on them.
Thanks,
Nick
Powered by blists - more mailing lists