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 ESMTPS id 826CADDF83 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2008 08:19:03 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/16] powerpc/mm: Add SMP support to no-hash TLB handling v3 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Kumar Gala In-Reply-To: References: <20081215054554.E883EDDF9D@ozlabs.org> <1229373978.26324.120.camel@pasglop> <1229374984.26324.125.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 08:18:57 +1100 Message-Id: <1229375937.26324.128.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 15:10 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote: > Hmm.. are you mixing the two different locking needs together? The is > locking of ivax vs tlbwe and there is locking around multiple "msgs" > on the bus. I know for us we can have any # of ivax's on the bus, but > only one tlbsync. I'm purely talking about the later. Right now I only issue one ivax + one tlbsycn anyway but I was thinking about having _tlbivax_bcast take a count for small ranges, but I would still lock the whole thing because some impl I know of don't like multiple ivax coliding form different sources neither. Cheers, Ben.