From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
Subject: Re: Page aging broken in 2.6
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 11:44:59 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1072485899.15456.96.camel@gaston> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0312261626260.14874@home.osdl.org>
On Sat, 2003-12-27 at 11:35, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Dec 2003, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> >
> > Or do what I propose here, that is have ptep_test_and_clear_* be
> > responsible for the flush on archs where it is necessary, but then
> > it would be nice to have more than the ptep as an argument...
>
> The dirty handling already does the TLB flush (in that case it's a
> correctness issue, not a hint). So it's only ptep_test_and_clear_young()
> that matters.
Yes, but it would be possible to optimize it some way on our
beloved hash tables ;) (By marking the entry read-only in the
hash instead of evicting it). Maybe not worth the pain though...
> I don't know whather that ever ends up being performance-critical, and I
> don't see what else could be passed into it. We literally don't _have_
> anythign else than the pte.
Ok, figured that out.
> But the ppc architecture could easily decide to walk the hash tables and
> invalidate in ptep_test_and_clear_young(). And if it ends up being a
> performance issue, it _appears_ that all users of "page_referenced()"
> (which is the only thing that does this) are actually using the return
> value as just a boolean. And it's entirely possible that we should break
> out of "page_referenced()" on the _first_ hit of "yes, this has been
> referenced".
Except that we may expect all "referencing" PTEs to have the accessed
bit cleared, no ? Or if we have lots of users we'll end up getting lots
of positive results while after the page was actually referenced... I
don't know if this would be a real problem though.
> That would make it much less CPU-intensive to make
> "ptep_test_and_clear_young()" slightly heavier to execute. It would also
> cause "page_referenced()" to not clear _all_ mapped reference bits at the
> same time - which might unfairly cause multi-used pages to stay in memory.
> On the other hand, that might be the _right_ behaviour.
>
> Rik? Andrea?
>
> Worth testing, perhaps.
Ok, right now, Anton is testing a patch from paulus where we do our
own flush batching and do the flush inside ptep_test_and_clear_* That
will at least fix the problem for us now.
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-12-27 0:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-12-26 7:28 Page aging broken in 2.6 Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-12-26 7:40 ` Andrew Morton
2003-12-26 9:21 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-12-26 9:58 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-12-26 19:44 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-12-26 9:33 ` Russell King
2003-12-26 10:07 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-12-26 17:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-12-26 23:55 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-12-27 0:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-12-27 0:44 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2003-12-27 0:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-12-27 0:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-12-27 1:03 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-12-27 2:37 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2003-12-27 5:02 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-12-27 10:16 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-12-27 2:47 ` Rik van Riel
2003-12-27 3:00 ` Andrew Morton
2003-12-27 3:31 ` Rik van Riel
2003-12-27 3:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-12-27 16:34 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-12-27 23:07 ` Roger Luethi
2003-12-27 23:55 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-12-28 11:23 ` Roger Luethi
2003-12-28 16:35 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-12-28 17:15 ` Roger Luethi
2003-12-28 0:04 ` Andrew Morton
2003-12-28 11:58 ` Roger Luethi
2003-12-27 1:41 ` Andrea Arcangeli
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-12-26 10:45 Manfred Spraul
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=1072485899.15456.96.camel@gaston \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.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