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=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 9C3BCC4743D for ; Sat, 5 Jun 2021 00:18:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (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 A77BE613AD for ; Sat, 5 Jun 2021 00:18:30 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A77BE613AD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FxgGF3dBkz3bry for ; Sat, 5 Jun 2021 10:18:29 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20161025 header.b=ooclrGet; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d; helo=mail-pg1-x52d.google.com; envelope-from=npiggin@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20161025 header.b=ooclrGet; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-pg1-x52d.google.com (mail-pg1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FxgFk4Vtmz2xtt for ; Sat, 5 Jun 2021 10:18:01 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-pg1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id v14so9119137pgi.6 for ; Fri, 04 Jun 2021 17:18:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:subject:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :message-id:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/jqiL/qTfJjmBNhopBIMzK+jxUaOluXuMLOEamwPvz4=; b=ooclrGet83DUu230tf4FqjEw2jni37mOcex/cGUcFjMlNdwwCLSISFDiNRYVGZ9NQA B4SgPsfHY6NHGf+Gp66PHRzYG/TuTxaFDmhYJhFKvW/6CFD1XZdBVUoDjbjWjY8FD6oh t9nz3xwRWtomGIQkOo8YDeWKAC17Y1UmYvFzpar/5hOKvXSH6R2IfU0ngKebihdFo86X VAWza+XExghJ6BtC+oyThvexpU6t7NfhWBExIhZJENY8GlAF6gPpaMAgdHMO2s/qUW5V 4TnJfwhemtLgA49w4ebjwlJ4GOhiqZDiQUS6bn4D5Y2ZoQBlU7zppo8mkYcZ1Gpiybv0 dF7A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:subject:to:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:message-id:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/jqiL/qTfJjmBNhopBIMzK+jxUaOluXuMLOEamwPvz4=; b=GbWOT3U1M/9+WVw+UF3vQSa58S63l90aCjGoS8Ef6BHxv50ha/sVR6XzzjzIDrxIDK RRc5q5F3SQFMK2CnzReLXlNJz6WQyLLsQEkzzbnyHNPswJcXlCA1puQp4wAu5vz6bkyL iarTgCkNivD3uK+ZAFj580jc453V6qXub463TF3ZyVarDw+jBKPL1zUSYLNV2PriIHG6 IYyYxGmF1MqwTT4o8v4SMaDX4n4+8tDoCUq/sYlIozDhWKcyOtCYPubNNg1s9ARm+861 2En4txwnDt2NoS8ipiVmBN4Fx556010DTYM3K+S+S53YGDSk+BAxmDBG968LpCnslUHB VzZQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532i4bB0P8upraGjL/1VID57HtchGsXNwQrRUiC/8+8l/E6HiDf+ 96+jouQ7wsEr7UGiA7Mr9As= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxX5xGQ+5qD398du3WDmRtK/4PslOYTIhUdOtbETp67cATNtF6hZ89Y4CwdJ6aYpZEVsE0mEw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:8c09:: with SMTP id m9mr1584275pgd.392.1622852276317; Fri, 04 Jun 2021 17:17:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (60-242-147-73.tpgi.com.au. [60.242.147.73]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l126sm2665004pfl.16.2021.06.04.17.17.55 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 04 Jun 2021 17:17:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 10:17:50 +1000 From: Nicholas Piggin Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] shoot lazy tlbs To: Andrew Morton , Andy Lutomirski References: <20210601062303.3932513-1-npiggin@gmail.com> <603ffd67-3638-4c47-8067-c1bdfdf65f1b@kernel.org> <991660c3-c2bf-c303-a55c-7454f0cc45f7@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <991660c3-c2bf-c303-a55c-7454f0cc45f7@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1622851909.wxi3vcx3m8.astroid@bobo.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Randy Dunlap , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Excerpts from Andy Lutomirski's message of June 5, 2021 3:05 am: > On 6/4/21 9:54 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> On 5/31/21 11:22 PM, Nicholas Piggin wrote: >>> There haven't been objections to the series since last posting, this >>> is just a rebase and tidies up a few comments minor patch rearranging. >>> >>=20 >> I continue to object to having too many modes. I like my more generic >> improvements better. Let me try to find some time to email again. >>=20 >=20 > Specifically, this: >=20 > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/luto/linux.git/commit/?h= =3Dx86/mm That's worse than what powerpc does with the shoot lazies code so=20 we wouldn't use it anyway. The fact is mm-cpumask and lazy mm is very architecture specific, so I=20 don't really see that another "mode" is such a problem, it's for the=20 most part "this is what powerpc does" -> "this is what powerpc does". The only mode in the context switch is just "take a ref on the lazy mm" or "don't take a ref". Surely that's not too onerous to add!? Actually the bigger part of it is actually the no-lazy mmu mode which is not yet used, I thought it was a neat little demonstrator of how code works with/without lazy but I will get rid of that for submission. > I, or someone, needs to dust off my membarrier series before any of > these kinds of changes get made. The barrier situation in the scheduler > is too confusing otherwise. >=20 I disagree, I've disentangled the changes from membarrier stuff now,=20 they can be done concurrently. Thanks, Nick