All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] zap_pte_range: update addr when forcing flush after TLB batching faiure
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:16:34 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1414530994.29180.19.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxvz=guax4KcAszyjkqdqXGwV38O+G23xMvGFJDTrZqtg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 2014-10-28 at 09:25 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> > Since we have hardware broadcasting of TLB invalidations on ARM, it is
> > in our interest to keep the number of outstanding operations as small as
> > possible, particularly on large systems where we don't get the targetted
> > shootdown with a single message that you can perform using IPIs (i.e.
> > you can only broadcast to all or no CPUs, and that happens for each pte).
> 
> Do you seriously *have* to broadcast for each pte?

We do too, in current CPUs at least, it's sad ...

> Because that is quite frankly moronic.  We batch things up in software
> for a real good reason: doing things one entry at a time just cannot
> ever scale. At some point (and that point is usually not even very far
> away), it's much better to do a single invalidate over a range. The
> cost of having to refill the TLB's is *much* smaller than the cost of
> doing tons of cross-CPU invalidates.
> 
> That's true even for the cases where we track the CPU's involved in
> that mapping, and only invalidate a small subset. With a "all CPU's
> broadcast", the cross-over point must be even smaller. Doing thousands
> of CPU broadcasts is just crazy, even if they are hw-accelerated.
> 
> Can't you just do a full invalidate and a SW IPI for larger ranges?

For us, this would be great except ... we can potentially have other
agents with an MMU that only support snooping of the broadcasts...

> And as mentioned, true sparse mappings are actually fairly rare, so
> making extra effort (and data structures) to have individual ranges
> sounds crazy.
> 
> Is this some hw-enforced thing? You really can't turn off the
> cross-cpu-for-each-pte braindamage?

Cheers,
Ben.

>                          Linus
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/



  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-10-28 21:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-28 11:44 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Fix a couple of issues with zap_pte_range and MMU gather Will Deacon
2014-10-28 11:44 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] zap_pte_range: update addr when forcing flush after TLB batching faiure Will Deacon
2014-10-28 15:30   ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-28 16:07     ` Will Deacon
2014-10-28 16:25       ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-28 17:07         ` Will Deacon
2014-10-28 18:03           ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-28 21:16         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2014-10-28 21:32           ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-28 21:40     ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-29 19:47       ` Will Deacon
2014-10-29 21:11         ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-29 21:27           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-11-01 17:01             ` Linus Torvalds
2014-11-01 20:25               ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-11-03 17:56               ` Will Deacon
2014-11-03 18:05                 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-11-04 14:29         ` Catalin Marinas
2014-11-04 16:08           ` Linus Torvalds
2014-11-06 13:57             ` Catalin Marinas
2014-11-06 17:53               ` Linus Torvalds
2014-11-06 18:38                 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-11-06 21:29                   ` Linus Torvalds
2014-11-07 16:50                     ` Catalin Marinas
2014-11-10 13:56                       ` Will Deacon
2014-10-28 11:44 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] zap_pte_range: fix partial TLB flushing in response to a dirty pte Will Deacon
2014-10-28 15:18   ` Linus Torvalds

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1414530994.29180.19.camel@pasglop \
    --to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.