From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 16:12:49 +0100
Subject: parallel load of modules on an ARM multicore
In-Reply-To: <20110623145229.GA18409@1n450.cable.virginmedia.net>
References: <274124B9C6907D4B8CE985903EAA19E9185A92923E@SI-MBX06.de.bosch.com>
	<20110621155030.GA21245@1n450.cable.virginmedia.net>
	<274124B9C6907D4B8CE985903EAA19E9185A92978D@SI-MBX06.de.bosch.com>
	<20110623145229.GA18409@1n450.cable.virginmedia.net>
Message-ID: <20110623151249.GA23234@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 03:52:29PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> Peter,
> 
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 04:39:01PM +0200, EXTERNAL Waechtler Peter (Fa. TCP, CM-AI/PJ-CF31) wrote:
> > it's interesting that you almost agree with me.
> > 
> > But isn't it really expensive to flush the icache on switch_mm?
> > Is that meant as a test to see if the problem goes away?
> 
> Who said anything about flushing the icache on switch_mm()? My patch
> doesn't do this, it actually reduces the amount of cache flushing on
> ARM11MPCore.

Ahem, your patch does:

--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mmu_context.h
+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mmu_context.h
@@ -114,7 +114,8 @@ switch_mm(struct mm_struct *prev, struct mm_struct *next,
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
        /* check for possible thread migration */
        if (!cpumask_empty(mm_cpumask(next)) &&
-           !cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(next)))
+           (cache_ops_need_broadcast() ||
+            !cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(next))))
                __flush_icache_all();
 #endif
        if (!cpumask_test_and_set_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(next)) || prev != next) {

This means that if cache_ops_need_broadcast() is true, we will flush
the I-cache at every MM context switch as very few MMs will have an
empty mm_cpumask().

Far from reducing the number of I-cache flushes, this will significantly
increase the flushing.