[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230405195226.GB365912@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2023 21:52:26 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Yair Podemsky <ypodemsk@...hat.com>, linux@...linux.org.uk,
mpe@...erman.id.au, npiggin@...il.com, christophe.leroy@...roup.eu,
hca@...ux.ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com, agordeev@...ux.ibm.com,
borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com, svens@...ux.ibm.com,
davem@...emloft.net, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org,
hpa@...or.com, will@...nel.org, aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arnd@...db.de, keescook@...omium.org,
paulmck@...nel.org, jpoimboe@...nel.org, samitolvanen@...gle.com,
ardb@...nel.org, juerg.haefliger@...onical.com,
rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk, geert+renesas@...der.be,
tony@...mide.com, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
sebastian.reichel@...labora.com, nick.hawkins@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, vschneid@...hat.com, dhildenb@...hat.com,
alougovs@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/mmu_gather: send tlb_remove_table_smp_sync IPI
only to CPUs in kernel mode
On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 04:45:32PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 01:10:07PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 12:44:04PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 04:42:24PM +0300, Yair Podemsky wrote:
> > > > + int state = atomic_read(&ct->state);
> > > > + /* will return true only for cpus in kernel space */
> > > > + return state & CT_STATE_MASK == CONTEXT_KERNEL;
> > > > +}
> > >
> > > Also note that this doesn't stricly prevent userspace from being interrupted.
> > > You may well observe the CPU in kernel but it may receive the IPI later after
> > > switching to userspace.
> > >
> > > We could arrange for avoiding that with marking ct->state with a pending work bit
> > > to flush upon user entry/exit but that's a bit more overhead so I first need to
> > > know about your expectations here, ie: can you tolerate such an occasional
> > > interruption or not?
> >
> > Bah, actually what can we do to prevent from that racy IPI? Not much I fear...
>
> Use a different mechanism other than an IPI to ensure in progress
> __get_free_pages_fast() has finished execution.
>
> Isnt this codepath slow path enough that it can use
> synchronize_rcu_expedited?
To actually hit this path you're doing something really dodgy.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists