[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a486ad3f-8fb6-c37b-9e7e-c6ba1a841b57@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2022 10:01:37 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mm/tlb: ignore f->new_tlb_gen when zero
On 7/8/22 09:54, Nadav Amit wrote:
> Since the bug was not during MADV_DONTNEED there is no reason for the
> results to be any different.
>
> Famous last words?
Considering that your patch broke the kernel a way that surprised us
all, I think caution is warranted. Re-running a microbenchmark that
takes five minutes and stresses things a bit is the least you can do, I
think.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists