From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761437AbYB0X5s (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:57:48 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759008AbYB0X5b (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:57:31 -0500 Received: from host36-195-149-62.serverdedicati.aruba.it ([62.149.195.36]:51055 "EHLO mx.cpushare.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758650AbYB0X5a (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:57:30 -0500 Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 00:57:24 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Nick Piggin , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Robin Holt , Avi Kivity , Izik Eidus , kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Peter Zijlstra , general@lists.openfabrics.org, Steve Wise , Roland Dreier , Kanoj Sarcar , steiner@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, daniel.blueman@quadrics.com Subject: Re: [patch 2/6] mmu_notifier: Callbacks to invalidate address ranges Message-ID: <20080227235724.GA8091@v2.random> References: <20080215064859.384203497@sgi.com> <20080215064932.620773824@sgi.com> <200802191954.14874.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20080219133405.GH7128@v2.random> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 02:23:29PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > How would that work? You rely on the pte locking. Thus calls are all in an I don't rely on the pte locking in #v7, exactly to satisfy GRU (so far purely theoretical) performance complains. > atomic context. I think we need a general scheme that allows sleeping when Calls are still in atomic context until we change the i_mmap_lock to a mutex under a CONFIG_XPMEM, or unless we boost mm_users, drop the lock and restart the loop at every different mm. In any case those changes should be under CONFIG_XPMEM IMHO given desktop users definitely don't need this (regular non-blocking mmu notifiers in my patch are all what a desktop user need as far as I can tell). > references are invalidates. Even the GRU has performance issues when using > the KVM patch. GRU will perform the same with #v7 or V8. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [patch 2/6] mmu_notifier: Callbacks to invalidate address ranges Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 00:57:24 +0100 Message-ID: <20080227235724.GA8091@v2.random> References: <20080215064859.384203497@sgi.com> <20080215064932.620773824@sgi.com> <200802191954.14874.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20080219133405.GH7128@v2.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Nick Piggin , steiner@sgi.com, Peter Zijlstra , linux-mm@kvack.org, Kanoj Sarcar , Roland Dreier , Steve Wise , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Avi Kivity , kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, daniel.blueman@quadrics.com, Robin Holt , general@lists.openfabrics.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org To: Christoph Lameter Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 02:23:29PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > How would that work? You rely on the pte locking. Thus calls are all in an I don't rely on the pte locking in #v7, exactly to satisfy GRU (so far purely theoretical) performance complains. > atomic context. I think we need a general scheme that allows sleeping when Calls are still in atomic context until we change the i_mmap_lock to a mutex under a CONFIG_XPMEM, or unless we boost mm_users, drop the lock and restart the loop at every different mm. In any case those changes should be under CONFIG_XPMEM IMHO given desktop users definitely don't need this (regular non-blocking mmu notifiers in my patch are all what a desktop user need as far as I can tell). > references are invalidates. Even the GRU has performance issues when using > the KVM patch. GRU will perform the same with #v7 or V8. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 00:57:24 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [patch 2/6] mmu_notifier: Callbacks to invalidate address ranges Message-ID: <20080227235724.GA8091@v2.random> References: <20080215064859.384203497@sgi.com> <20080215064932.620773824@sgi.com> <200802191954.14874.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20080219133405.GH7128@v2.random> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Nick Piggin , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Robin Holt , Avi Kivity , Izik Eidus , kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Peter Zijlstra , general@lists.openfabrics.org, Steve Wise , Roland Dreier , Kanoj Sarcar , steiner@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, daniel.blueman@quadrics.com List-ID: On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 02:23:29PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > How would that work? You rely on the pte locking. Thus calls are all in an I don't rely on the pte locking in #v7, exactly to satisfy GRU (so far purely theoretical) performance complains. > atomic context. I think we need a general scheme that allows sleeping when Calls are still in atomic context until we change the i_mmap_lock to a mutex under a CONFIG_XPMEM, or unless we boost mm_users, drop the lock and restart the loop at every different mm. In any case those changes should be under CONFIG_XPMEM IMHO given desktop users definitely don't need this (regular non-blocking mmu notifiers in my patch are all what a desktop user need as far as I can tell). > references are invalidates. Even the GRU has performance issues when using > the KVM patch. GRU will perform the same with #v7 or V8. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org