From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD008DDF35 for ; Tue, 15 May 2007 17:38:46 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: [patch 4/4] powerpc 2.6.21-rt1: reduce scheduling latency by changing tlb flush size From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Tsutomu OWA In-Reply-To: References: <1179125506.22481.297.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200705141640.02561.arnd@arndb.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 17:38:27 +1000 Message-Id: <1179214707.32247.177.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Thomas Gleixner , mingo@elte.hu, Arnd Bergmann , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT > + /* > + * Since flushing tlb needs expensive hypervisor call(s) on celleb, > + * always flush it on RT to reduce scheduling latency. > + */ > + if (machine_is(celleb)) { > + flush_tlb_pending(); > + return; > + } > +#endif /* CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT */ > + > if (i >= PPC64_TLB_BATCH_NR) > flush_tlb_pending(); > } Any reason to do that only on celleb ? :-) Also, we might want to still batch, though in smaller amount. Have you measured the time it takes ? We might want to modulate the amount based on wether we are using native hash tables or an hypervisor. Ben.