From: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>
To: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>,
jroedel@suse.de, Jay.Cornwall@amd.com, Oded.Gabbay@amd.com,
John.Bridgman@amd.com, Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com,
ben.sander@amd.com, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mmu_notifier: Add mmu_notifier_invalidate_range()
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 23:57:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140725215718.GO14017@8bytes.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140725144213.773474e4@jbarnes-desktop>
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 02:42:13PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 23:38:06 +0200
> Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> wrote:
> > I though about removing the need for invalidate_range_end too when
> > writing the patches, and possible solutions are
> >
> > 1) Add mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() to all places where
> > start/end is called too. This might add some unnecessary
> > overhead.
> >
> > 2) Call the invalidate_range() call-back from the
> > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end too.
> >
> > 3) Just let the user register the same function for
> > invalidate_range and invalidate_range_end
> >
> > I though that option 1) adds overhead that is not needed (but it might
> > not be too bad, the overhead is an additional iteration over the
> > mmu_notifer list when there are no call-backs registered).
> >
> > Option 2) might also be overhead if a user registers different functions
> > for invalidate_range() and invalidate_range_end(). In the end I came to
> > the conclusion that option 3) is the best one from an overhead POV.
> >
> > But probably targeting better usability with one of the other options is
> > a better choice? I am open for thoughts and suggestions on that.
>
> Making the _end callback just do another TLB flush is fine too, but it
> would be nice to have the consistency of (1). I can live with either
> though, as long as the callbacks are well documented.
You are right, having this consistency would be good. The more I think
about it, the more it makes sense to go with option 2). Option 1) would
mean that invalidate_range is explicitly called right before
invalidate_range_end at some places. Doing this implicitly like in
option 2) is cleaner and less error-prone. And the list of mmu_notifiers
needs only be traversed once in invalidate_range_end(), so additional
overhead is minimal. I'll update patch 3 for this, unless there are
other opinions.
Joerg
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>
To: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>,
jroedel@suse.de, Jay.Cornwall@amd.com, Oded.Gabbay@amd.com,
John.Bridgman@amd.com, Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com,
ben.sander@amd.com, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mmu_notifier: Add mmu_notifier_invalidate_range()
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 23:57:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140725215718.GO14017@8bytes.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140725144213.773474e4@jbarnes-desktop>
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 02:42:13PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 23:38:06 +0200
> Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> wrote:
> > I though about removing the need for invalidate_range_end too when
> > writing the patches, and possible solutions are
> >
> > 1) Add mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() to all places where
> > start/end is called too. This might add some unnecessary
> > overhead.
> >
> > 2) Call the invalidate_range() call-back from the
> > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end too.
> >
> > 3) Just let the user register the same function for
> > invalidate_range and invalidate_range_end
> >
> > I though that option 1) adds overhead that is not needed (but it might
> > not be too bad, the overhead is an additional iteration over the
> > mmu_notifer list when there are no call-backs registered).
> >
> > Option 2) might also be overhead if a user registers different functions
> > for invalidate_range() and invalidate_range_end(). In the end I came to
> > the conclusion that option 3) is the best one from an overhead POV.
> >
> > But probably targeting better usability with one of the other options is
> > a better choice? I am open for thoughts and suggestions on that.
>
> Making the _end callback just do another TLB flush is fine too, but it
> would be nice to have the consistency of (1). I can live with either
> though, as long as the callbacks are well documented.
You are right, having this consistency would be good. The more I think
about it, the more it makes sense to go with option 2). Option 1) would
mean that invalidate_range is explicitly called right before
invalidate_range_end at some places. Doing this implicitly like in
option 2) is cleaner and less error-prone. And the list of mmu_notifiers
needs only be traversed once in invalidate_range_end(), so additional
overhead is minimal. I'll update patch 3 for this, unless there are
other opinions.
Joerg
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-25 21:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-24 14:35 [PATCH 0/3] mmu_notifier: Allow to manage CPU external TLBs Joerg Roedel
2014-07-24 14:35 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-07-24 14:35 ` Joerg Roedel
[not found] ` <1406212541-25975-1-git-send-email-joro-zLv9SwRftAIdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2014-07-24 14:35 ` [PATCH 1/3] mmu_notifier: Add mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() Joerg Roedel
2014-07-24 14:35 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-07-24 14:35 ` Joerg Roedel
[not found] ` <1406212541-25975-2-git-send-email-joro-zLv9SwRftAIdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2014-07-25 20:16 ` Jesse Barnes
2014-07-25 20:16 ` Jesse Barnes
2014-07-25 20:16 ` Jesse Barnes
2014-07-25 20:43 ` Jerome Glisse
2014-07-25 20:43 ` Jerome Glisse
2014-07-25 20:43 ` Jerome Glisse
2014-07-25 21:38 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-07-25 21:38 ` Joerg Roedel
[not found] ` <20140725213806.GN14017-zLv9SwRftAIdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2014-07-25 21:42 ` Jesse Barnes
2014-07-25 21:42 ` Jesse Barnes
2014-07-25 21:42 ` Jesse Barnes
2014-07-25 21:57 ` Joerg Roedel [this message]
2014-07-25 21:57 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-07-25 21:47 ` Jerome Glisse
2014-07-25 21:47 ` Jerome Glisse
2014-07-25 21:47 ` Jerome Glisse
2014-07-24 14:35 ` [PATCH 2/3] mmu_notifier: Call mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() from VMM Joerg Roedel
2014-07-24 14:35 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-07-24 14:35 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-07-24 14:35 ` [PATCH 3/3] mmu_notifier: Add the call-back for mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() Joerg Roedel
2014-07-24 14:35 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-07-24 14:35 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-07-24 14:44 ` [PATCH 0/3] mmu_notifier: Allow to manage CPU external TLBs Andrea Arcangeli
2014-07-24 14:44 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2014-07-24 23:33 ` Andrew Morton
2014-07-24 23:33 ` Andrew Morton
2014-07-25 3:10 ` Sander, Ben
2014-07-25 3:10 ` Sander, Ben
[not found] ` <20140724163303.df34065a3c3b26c0a4b3bab1-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
2014-07-25 7:47 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-07-25 7:47 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-07-25 7:47 ` Joerg Roedel
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-07-29 16:18 [PATCH 0/3 v2] " Joerg Roedel
2014-07-29 16:18 ` [PATCH 1/3] mmu_notifier: Add mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() Joerg Roedel
2014-07-29 16:18 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-09-09 15:43 [PATCH 0/3 v3] mmu_notifier: Allow to manage CPU external TLBs Joerg Roedel
2014-09-09 15:43 ` [PATCH 1/3] mmu_notifier: Add mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() Joerg Roedel
2014-09-09 15:43 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-09-09 15:43 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-10-28 17:13 [PATCH 0/3 v4] mmu_notifier: Allow to manage CPU external TLBs Joerg Roedel
[not found] ` <1414516440-910-1-git-send-email-joro-zLv9SwRftAIdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2014-10-28 17:13 ` [PATCH 1/3] mmu_notifier: Add mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() Joerg Roedel
2014-10-28 17:13 ` Joerg Roedel
2014-10-28 17:13 ` Joerg Roedel
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=20140725215718.GO14017@8bytes.org \
--to=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=Jay.Cornwall@amd.com \
--cc=John.Bridgman@amd.com \
--cc=Oded.Gabbay@amd.com \
--cc=Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ben.sander@amd.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
--cc=jroedel@suse.de \
--cc=jweiner@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=riel@redhat.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.