[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180824113953.GL24142@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:39:53 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@....ibm.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Adin Scannell <ascannell@...gle.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <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 Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 01:32:14PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:47:17AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:39:59PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > The only problem with this approach is that we've lost track of the granule
> > > size by the point we get to the tlb_flush(), so we can't adjust the stride of
> > > the TLB invalidations for huge mappings, which actually works nicely in the
> > > synchronous case (e.g. we perform a single invalidation for a 2MB mapping,
> > > rather than iterating over it at a 4k granule).
> > >
> > > One thing we could do is switch to synchronous mode if we detect a change in
> > > granule (i.e. treat it like a batch failure).
> >
> > We could use tlb_start_vma() to track that, I think. Shouldn't be too
> > hard.
>
> Hurm.. look at commit:
>
> e77b0852b551 ("mm/mmu_gather: track page size with mmu gather and force flush if page size change")
Ah, good, it seems that already got cleaned up a lot. But it all moved
into the power code.. blergh.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists