From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756240AbYB2BGm (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 20:06:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758595AbYB2Azh (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:55:37 -0500 Received: from host36-195-149-62.serverdedicati.aruba.it ([62.149.195.36]:37797 "EHLO mx.cpushare.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1764224AbYB2Azf (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:55:35 -0500 Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 01:55:30 +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: <20080229005530.GO8091@v2.random> References: <20080215064859.384203497@sgi.com> <20080215064932.620773824@sgi.com> <200802201008.49933.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20080228001104.GB8091@v2.random> <20080228005249.GF8091@v2.random> <20080228011020.GG8091@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 Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:43:54AM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > What about invalidate_page()? That would just spin waiting an ack (just like the smp-tlb-flushing invalidates in numa already does). Thinking more about this, we could also parallelize it with an invalidate_page_before/end. If it takes 1usec to flush remotely, scheduling would be overkill, but spending 1usec in a while loop isn't nice if we can parallelize that 1usec with the ipi-tlb-flush. Not sure if it makes sense... it certainly would be quick to add it (especially thanks to _notify ;). 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: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 01:55:30 +0100 Message-ID: <20080229005530.GO8091@v2.random> References: <20080215064859.384203497@sgi.com> <20080215064932.620773824@sgi.com> <200802201008.49933.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20080228001104.GB8091@v2.random> <20080228005249.GF8091@v2.random> <20080228011020.GG8091@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 Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:43:54AM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > What about invalidate_page()? That would just spin waiting an ack (just like the smp-tlb-flushing invalidates in numa already does). Thinking more about this, we could also parallelize it with an invalidate_page_before/end. If it takes 1usec to flush remotely, scheduling would be overkill, but spending 1usec in a while loop isn't nice if we can parallelize that 1usec with the ipi-tlb-flush. Not sure if it makes sense... it certainly would be quick to add it (especially thanks to _notify ;). ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 01:55:30 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [patch 2/6] mmu_notifier: Callbacks to invalidate address ranges Message-ID: <20080229005530.GO8091@v2.random> References: <20080215064859.384203497@sgi.com> <20080215064932.620773824@sgi.com> <200802201008.49933.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20080228001104.GB8091@v2.random> <20080228005249.GF8091@v2.random> <20080228011020.GG8091@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 Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:43:54AM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > What about invalidate_page()? That would just spin waiting an ack (just like the smp-tlb-flushing invalidates in numa already does). Thinking more about this, we could also parallelize it with an invalidate_page_before/end. If it takes 1usec to flush remotely, scheduling would be overkill, but spending 1usec in a while loop isn't nice if we can parallelize that 1usec with the ipi-tlb-flush. Not sure if it makes sense... it certainly would be quick to add it (especially thanks to _notify ;). -- 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