[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210531063658.GB1143@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 08:36:58 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: palmerdabbelt@...gle.com
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, guoren@...nel.org,
Anup Patel <Anup.Patel@....com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev,
guoren@...ux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] riscv: Use use_asid_allocator flush TLB
On Sat, May 29, 2021 at 04:42:37PM -0700, palmerdabbelt@...gle.com wrote:
>>
>> Also the non-ASID code switches to a global flush once flushing more
>> than a single page. It might be worth documenting the tradeoff in the
>> code.
>
> For some reason I thought we'd written this down in the commentary of teh
> ISA manual as the suggested huersitic here, but I can't find it so maybe
> I'm wrong. If it's actually there it would be good to point that out,
> otherwise some documentation seems fine as it'll probably become a tunable
> at some point anyway.
The real question is why is the heuristic different for the ASID vs
non-ASID case? I think that really need a comment.
> LGTM. I took the first one as IMO they're really distnict issues, LMK if
> you want to re-spin this one or if I should just take what's here.
What distinct issue? The fact that the new code is buggy and uses rather
non-optimal calling conventions?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists