[lkml]   [2018]   [Jul]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/7] x86,tlb: make lazy TLB mode lazier
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:15 AM, Rik van Riel <> wrote:
> Given that CPUs in lazy TLB mode stay part of the mm_cpumask,
> that WARN_ON seems misplaced. You are right though, that the
> mm_cpumask alone should provide enough information for us to
> avoid a need for both tsk->active_mm and the refcounting.

If you do this extra shootdown after freeing pagetables, it would be
odd if mm_cpumask() wasn't empty. But you're right, the warn is
probably silly. And if you move it into arch_exit_mmap(), the warn is
definitely wrong.

> Does all that make sense? Basically, as I understand it, the
> expensive atomic ops you're seeing are all pointless because they're
> enabling an optimization that hasn't actually worked for a long time,
> if ever.
> Our benchmark results suggest that lazy TLB mode works, and makes
> a measurable performance difference. Getting rid of the atomic ops
> should make it a little better, though :)

I'm not saying lazy mode is useless. I'm saying that active_mm isn't
needed for x86's lazy mode :)

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-07-19 19:22    [W:0.183 / U:2.740 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site