linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Wohlgemuth, Jason" <jason_wohlgemuth@gilbarco.com>
To: "'linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org'"
	<linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org>
Cc: "Royal, Bill" <bill_royal@gilbarco.com>
Subject: Low Memory / Software Emulation Exception / Performance
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 09:50:45 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200004111350.JAA25971@hoover.gilbarco.com> (raw)


Just a few more questions.  After applying the head.S patch our software
emulation exceptions have gone away, although, I intend to go back and trip
the exception with a logic analyzer attached to verify everything with our
hardware engineer.  However, this patch seems to induce ultra-slow
performance in areas where we map physical memory down to the user-level
with /dev/mem, my guess is that it has something to do with this:

>From: Peter Allworth <linsol@zeta.org.au <mailto:linsol@zeta.org.au>>
>Basically, there are a couple of bugs in the MMU code of the 8xx port.
First, the code assumes that the "write-protected" and "dirty" >attributes
of a page can be folded into a single flag. Unfortunately, when a process
forks, the data pages are set up for copy-on-write in >both the parent and
child processes so that they can be shared. This is done by marking those
pages "write-protected" which, in the >code as it stands, results in any
"dirty" pages being set back to "clean". Later, when the kernel is trying to
free up memory, it wrongly >assumes these pages are unmodified and discards
them! My solution to this problem is as follows. In
include/asm-ppc/pgtable.h, >rename 0x0100 (the page changed bit) as
_PAGE_HWWRITE and 0x0020 (currently the write-through cache bit) as
_PAGE_DIRTY. >Unfortunately this means the write-through function is lost
since there are no more bits left so, for now, redefine _PAGE_WRITETHRU >to
be the same as _PAGE_NO_CACHE. (This is a bit inefficient so the fix is only
temporary.)
Specifically, the part regarding _PAGE_WRITETHRU being redefined to
_PAGE_NO_CACHE, is this a correct assumption?  Is anyone else running into
performance related issues with this patch applied?
Thanks,
Jason


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

             reply	other threads:[~2000-04-11 13:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2000-04-11 13:50 Wohlgemuth, Jason [this message]
2000-04-11 16:40 ` Low Memory / Software Emulation Exception / Performance Marcus Sundberg
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-04-11 17:20 Wohlgemuth, Jason
2000-04-11 18:43 Wohlgemuth, Jason
2000-04-12  0:43 ` Peter Allworth
2000-04-12 11:38 Wohlgemuth, Jason
2000-04-12 13:27 ` Dan Malek

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200004111350.JAA25971@hoover.gilbarco.com \
    --to=jason_wohlgemuth@gilbarco.com \
    --cc=bill_royal@gilbarco.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).