From: Jes Sorensen <jes@trained-monkey.org>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: smp_flush_tlb_mm
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 15:00:42 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-linux-ia64-106985904913387@msgid-missing> (raw)
Hi
Looking at some profiles on a 512p box I noticed that we are seeing a
few more smp_call_function calls than we really would like ;-)
To get around it I have implemented a on_each_cpu_masked() and using it
in flush_tlb_mm to reduce the call rate a bit. For flush_tlb_range it is
a little trickier since it relies on platform_global_purge_tlb() rather
than smp_call_function, so I am hoping we might be able to do a
platform_purge_tlb_masked() as well?
A preliminary patch for flush_tlb_mm and on_each_cpu_masked is attached.
Comments?
Cheers,
Jes
diff -urN -X /usr/people/jes/exclude-linux orig/linux-2.6.0-test10/arch/ia64/kernel/smp.c linux-2.6.0-test10/arch/ia64/kernel/smp.c
--- orig/linux-2.6.0-test10/arch/ia64/kernel/smp.c Sun Nov 23 17:33:24 2003
+++ linux-2.6.0-test10/arch/ia64/kernel/smp.c Wed Nov 26 05:57:32 2003
@@ -205,6 +205,55 @@
platform_send_ipi(cpu, IA64_IPI_RESCHEDULE, IA64_IPI_DM_INT, 0);
}
+
+/*
+ * Call a function on all processors
+ */
+static inline int on_each_cpu_masked(void (*func) (void *info), void *info,
+ int retry, int wait, cpumask_t cpumask)
+{
+ cpumask_t tmp;
+ struct call_data_struct data;
+ int ret = 0;
+ int cpus = 0;
+ int i;
+
+ cpus_and(tmp, cpumask, cpu_online_map);
+
+ data.func = func;
+ data.info = info;
+ atomic_set(&data.started, 0);
+ data.wait = wait;
+ if (wait)
+ atomic_set(&data.finished, 0);
+
+ get_cpu();
+ spin_lock_bh(&call_lock);
+
+ call_data = &data;
+ mb(); /* ensure store to call_data precedes setting of IPI_CALL_FUNC */
+ for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) {
+ if (cpu_isset(i, tmp), cpu_online(i)) {
+ cpus++;
+ send_IPI_single(i, IPI_CALL_FUNC);
+ }
+ }
+
+ /* Wait for response */
+ while (atomic_read(&data.started) != cpus)
+ barrier();
+
+ if (wait)
+ while (atomic_read(&data.finished) != cpus)
+ barrier();
+ call_data = NULL;
+
+ spin_unlock_bh(&call_lock);
+ put_cpu();
+ return ret;
+}
+
+
void
smp_flush_tlb_all (void)
{
@@ -228,7 +277,12 @@
* anyhow, and once a CPU is interrupted, the cost of local_flush_tlb_all() is
* rather trivial.
*/
+#if 0
on_each_cpu((void (*)(void *))local_finish_flush_tlb_mm, mm, 1, 1);
+#else
+ on_each_cpu_masked((void (*)(void *))local_finish_flush_tlb_mm, mm,
+ 1, 1, mm->cpu_vm_mask);
+#endif
}
/*
next reply other threads:[~2003-11-26 15:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-26 15:00 Jes Sorensen [this message]
2003-11-26 19:19 ` smp_flush_tlb_mm Jack Steiner
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=marc-linux-ia64-106985904913387@msgid-missing \
--to=jes@trained-monkey.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox