[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b2ca84d6-6f01-4483-b22b-d33aa7ab6a0f@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 10:57:30 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>, x86@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bp@...en8.de, peterz@...radead.org,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, zhengqi.arch@...edance.com,
nadav.amit@...il.com, thomas.lendacky@....com, kernel-team@...a.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jackmanb@...gle.com,
jannh@...gle.com, mhklinux@...look.com, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com,
Manali Shukla <Manali.Shukla@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 07/12] x86/mm: use INVLPGB in flush_tlb_all
On 2/13/25 08:13, Rik van Riel wrote:
> void flush_tlb_all(void)
> {
> + if (broadcast_flush_tlb_all())
> + return;
> count_vm_tlb_event(NR_TLB_REMOTE_FLUSH);
> on_each_cpu(do_flush_tlb_all, NULL, 1);
> }
This could use a couple of one-line comments.
Also, let's just keep the NR_TLB_REMOTE_FLUSH manipulation even when
using the INVLPGB. It's still logically a remote flush even if it
doesn't use an IPI.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists