From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DB4DC55822 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2026 18:07:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=4pNvk/hVxan4X92LEuNLrhC26XmWg6H10cQTm3nYIy8=; b=Z8bRSiE2RZqrAvGzpwZ1IViszw 4dpaPkVbgp7Z/0p0z/QRGHFutZ7nvPfiT/NaYr29jNtJgovY3ZppBBSAV+/qMTYQ5STacAgy4DEll oSlVHnXqpRwUHv2OUIze2PRqwjN0A4pm09XbdEzSHTsPaS7jx5AF6JnFtVZ6Cns+SZJnUl7pS3zvY ljf5+Hn2hnvr5364Wnu06G7WGA9/rkVponaQnv4VenzdjrlLEy7SO8BqeNYOf8IEKFIR8WcaC3UeI 4/oPuxo0Fe+UISB/3ib3QAsCoGYdnGmBhaHMHSnGLfjLYaXLQVedsYt+vaJBZTWy4OO7pC6gCmTRs KPrd5ieg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wrJXS-00000002ZYH-3Xx0; Tue, 04 Aug 2026 18:06:54 +0000 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([2001:8b0:10b:1236::1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wrJXR-00000002ZXf-3Hro for linux-arm-kernel@bombadil.infradead.org; Tue, 04 Aug 2026 18:06:53 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=4pNvk/hVxan4X92LEuNLrhC26XmWg6H10cQTm3nYIy8=; b=TpyaRaYZLg/n2BYtHJXErQH29W 6pY46PDbcU/PJH6PFMKJMixpiZtwudk778hqs51AMMiK/YZTaHHmwNyd5NQnvASuFayXom6gJ/viN CBa9xLRHNV2SDR9WVxhUb9u1vohm90k5Vqbs4Kh+XAiMe28Xfa2rKTBBJzp7xy7LZ5N4maISrddCD M7UQfCBzU4lu+qb3CLknfmWgfsJ0R31KepvHYgd3/fWwlH9ldg4ILGUOdWyEnfN9MxQDjwF0pv4q8 ZJeRe9Wqm1Ij/J4TxN4bPCrPtfEEv30uJE5Z2zqzfPZ7ZRjDlgfbTtm/YYGyDbgIERxzyby5g2tsA ITpE0eFA==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wrJXP-00000004SL5-3nTg; Tue, 04 Aug 2026 18:06:51 +0000 Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2026 19:06:51 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" , "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" , "Christoph Lameter (Ampere)" , Mark Rutland , Yang Shi , Ryan Roberts , dennis@kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, urezki@gmail.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, hca@linux.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com, agordeev@linux.ibm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 0/16] Optimize this_cpu_*() ops for non-x86 (ARM64 for this series) Message-ID: References: <20260715180455.515692-1-yang@os.amperecomputing.com> <0344c559-1959-4531-9265-d5a5180eb7cd@arm.com> <25d1e09b-53e4-7cd5-87db-b58437e4e690@gentwo.org> <4887267b-dc26-4c33-96ca-8dff054a0d1f@kernel.org> <20260804144054.GE27883@nvidia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260804144054.GE27883@nvidia.com> X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Aug 04, 2026 at 11:40:54AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > That said there is still a merit for things like replicating .text, and > I think we will also have some multi-socket systems that would benefit > from this too.. Are you referring to kernel text replication or userspace text replication? If the latter, I don't think we need per-CPU page tables to do it.