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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97849C47082 for ; Mon, 31 May 2021 06:37:17 +0000 (UTC) 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 mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 558DD61108 for ; Mon, 31 May 2021 06:37:17 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 558DD61108 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-riscv-bounces+linux-riscv=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=mIVnKqUZ+PC6TB3k88ZHE25ucRI4NJQEULPLuOmMhUQ=; b=0mLvzkkNG1p3t3 kp5Cput1svdzZWL1guXyrvHVkDBHXFKFq/BHuqyEZ1c144EcD9dNdueUHN7hb7k3lf7xyAa0f1E86 Jmx7suMQRgvrZd7u63falV/03l1pPenB+j8lIGwTX0kS+WD0b0uymqQF2M0L828jEV85+sW7qBz6Z MZZg4Gvpi9pBHkfjoENoxvamuJoSoCyC+Hf5tYqS4f78M7/V/dyMTob+zzRLW3Mc5UwuqUKHXYT7l mLQY8+r/WJVwBZxUb1xZdZwUZIM5CtXjYmnizDJB+/cXRruYkUT0St12m/K9mMtxWCq1mo1h5MU2a GkLH1KiknXc9xuOd/Aig==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lnbXr-00Ayqp-Du; Mon, 31 May 2021 06:37:03 +0000 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lnbXp-00AyqG-0B for linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 31 May 2021 06:37:02 +0000 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 4B7F367373; Mon, 31 May 2021 08:36:58 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 08:36:58 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: palmerdabbelt@google.com Cc: Christoph Hellwig , guoren@kernel.org, Anup Patel , Arnd Bergmann , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev, guoren@linux.alibaba.com Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] riscv: Use use_asid_allocator flush TLB Message-ID: <20210531063658.GB1143@lst.de> References: <20210527070903.GA32653@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210530_233701_215600_D0EC649B X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 17.82 ) X-BeenThere: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-riscv" Errors-To: linux-riscv-bounces+linux-riscv=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Sat, May 29, 2021 at 04:42:37PM -0700, palmerdabbelt@google.com wrote: >> >> Also the non-ASID code switches to a global flush once flushing more >> than a single page. It might be worth documenting the tradeoff in the >> code. > > For some reason I thought we'd written this down in the commentary of teh > ISA manual as the suggested huersitic here, but I can't find it so maybe > I'm wrong. If it's actually there it would be good to point that out, > otherwise some documentation seems fine as it'll probably become a tunable > at some point anyway. The real question is why is the heuristic different for the ASID vs non-ASID case? I think that really need a comment. > LGTM. I took the first one as IMO they're really distnict issues, LMK if > you want to re-spin this one or if I should just take what's here. What distinct issue? The fact that the new code is buggy and uses rather non-optimal calling conventions? _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv