From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756881AbYG2Kq1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 06:46:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754936AbYG2KqT (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 06:46:19 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:36964 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754883AbYG2KqT (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 06:46:19 -0400 Subject: Re: x86: Is there still value in having a special tlb flush IPI vector? From: Peter Zijlstra To: Nick Piggin Cc: Ingo Molnar , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Jens Axboe , Andi Kleen , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" In-Reply-To: <200807292000.30690.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> References: <488E534F.2030204@goop.org> <200807291430.08220.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <1217325288.7563.2.camel@twins> <200807292000.30690.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 12:45:51 +0200 Message-Id: <1217328351.7563.12.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 20:00 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > On Tuesday 29 July 2008 19:54, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 14:30 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > Not to mention the minor problem that it still deadlocks when called with > > > interrupts disabled ;) > > > > __smp_call_function_single has potential though.. > > For reschedule interrupt? I don't really agree. How about using just arch_send_call_function_single_ipi() to implement smp_send_reschedule() ? The overhead of that is a smp_mb() and a list_empty() check in generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt() if there is indeed no work to do.