[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191218141501.GT2844@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 15:15:01 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...abs.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
npiggin@...il.com, will@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mm/mmu_gather: Invalidate TLB correctly on batch
allocation failure and flush
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 12:13:48AM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> >> I'm a little confused though; if nohash is a software TLB fill, why do
> >> you need a TLBI for tables?
> >>
> >
> > nohash (AKA book3e) has different mmu modes. I don't follow all the
> > details w.r.t book3e. Paul or Michael might be able to explain the need
> > for table flush with book3e.
>
> Some of the Book3E CPUs have a partial hardware table walker. The IBM one (A2)
> did, before we ripped that support out. And the Freescale (NXP) e6500
> does, see eg:
>
> 28efc35fe68d ("powerpc/e6500: TLB miss handler with hardware tablewalk support")
>
> They only support walking one level IIRC, ie. you can create a TLB entry
> that points to a PTE page, and the hardware will dereference that to get
> a PTE and load that into the TLB.
Shiny!, all the embedded goodness. Thanks for the info.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists