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 AA2312C007A for ; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 21:44:21 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <1370087051.3766.40.camel@pasglop> Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Always invalidate tlb on hpte invalidate and update From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Michael Ellerman Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2013 21:44:11 +1000 In-Reply-To: <20130601111908.GA16571@concordia> References: <1369998204-31490-1-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20130601111908.GA16571@concordia> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "Aneesh Kumar K.V" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sat, 2013-06-01 at 21:19 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 04:33:24PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > > From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" > > > > If a hash bucket gets full, we "evict" a more/less random entry from it. > > When we do that we don't invalidate the TLB (hpte_remove) because we assume > > the old translation is still technically "valid". This implies that when > > we are invalidating or updating pte, even if HPTE entry is not valid > > we should do a tlb invalidate. > > > > Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V > > Has this always been a bug? I assume not. > > I'm asking because I have a kernel that's crashing and I'm wondering if > I might need this commit. Bug got introduced in either b1022fbd293564de91596b8775340cf41ad5214c or 7e74c3921ad9610c0b49f28b8fc69f7480505841, the jury is still out on that one :-) It's unlikely to crash the kernel however (it *can*, it's just unlikely). Patch is good to have regardless... Cheers, Ben.