From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] x86/tlb: optimizing flush_tlb_mm Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 09:39:05 -0400 Message-ID: <1337089145.14207.288.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> References: <1337072138-8323-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com> <1337072138-8323-7-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com> <1337087170.27020.166.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:32184 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758929Ab2EONjL (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2012 09:39:11 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1337087170.27020.166.camel@laptop> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Luming Yu , Nick Piggin , Alex Shi , tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, arnd@arndb.de, fweisbec@gmail.com, jeremy@goop.org, riel@redhat.com, luto@mit.edu, avi@redhat.com, len.brown@intel.com, dhowells@redhat.com, fenghua.yu@intel.com, borislav.petkov@amd.com, yinghai@kernel.org, ak@linux.intel.com, cpw@sgi.com, steiner@sgi.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, penberg@kernel.org, hughd@google.com, rientjes@google.com, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com, tj@kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk, jmorris@namei.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yongjie.ren@intel.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, jcm@jonmasters.org On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 15:06 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 20:58 +0800, Luming Yu wrote: > > > > > > Both __native_flush_tlb() and __native_flush_tlb_single(...) > > introduced roughly 1 ns latency to tsc sampling executed in > > stop_machine_context in two logical CPUs > > But you have to weight that against the cost of re-population, and > that's the difficult bit, since we have no clue how many tlb entries are > in use by the current cr3. > > It might be possible for intel to give us this information, I've asked > for something similar for cachelines. What information? The # of tlb entries in use? -- Steve