[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+FuTSedhCD2_uWL17bNSjDG5+3RhagkjFCVMcOx9G4H7byi2g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:08:52 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
Paul Chavent <paul.chavent@...ra.fr>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
daniel.borkmann@....ee.ethz.ch, xemul@...allels.com,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net-packet: tx timestamping on tpacket ring
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:45 AM, David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com> wrote:
>> > + case TPACKET_V1:
>> > + h1 = frame;
>> > + h1->tp_sec = ts.tv_sec;
>> > + h1->tp_usec = ts.tv_nsec / NSEC_PER_USEC;
>> > +
>> > + flush_dcache_page(pgv_to_page(&h1->tp_sec));
>> > + flush_dcache_page(pgv_to_page(&h1->tp_usec));
>>
>> Hmm, not sure, but could we also flush the dcache only once?
>
> If it isn't a silly question, why is the dcache being flushed
> here at all?
I'm not an expert on this, but have a look at
Documentation/cachetlb.txt, specifically the bits on this function and
the discussion of aliasing: on virtually indexed cache architectures,
the same physical address may be cached in multiple cachelines at the
same time. If I understand correctly, updating the kernel logical
address does not necessarily invalidate the user virtual cacheline for
the same physical memory.
> David
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists