From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] zap_pte_range: update addr when forcing flush after TLB batching faiure
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:16:34 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1414530994.29180.19.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxvz=guax4KcAszyjkqdqXGwV38O+G23xMvGFJDTrZqtg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 2014-10-28 at 09:25 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Since we have hardware broadcasting of TLB invalidations on ARM, it is
> > in our interest to keep the number of outstanding operations as small as
> > possible, particularly on large systems where we don't get the targetted
> > shootdown with a single message that you can perform using IPIs (i.e.
> > you can only broadcast to all or no CPUs, and that happens for each pte).
>
> Do you seriously *have* to broadcast for each pte?
We do too, in current CPUs at least, it's sad ...
> Because that is quite frankly moronic. We batch things up in software
> for a real good reason: doing things one entry at a time just cannot
> ever scale. At some point (and that point is usually not even very far
> away), it's much better to do a single invalidate over a range. The
> cost of having to refill the TLB's is *much* smaller than the cost of
> doing tons of cross-CPU invalidates.
>
> That's true even for the cases where we track the CPU's involved in
> that mapping, and only invalidate a small subset. With a "all CPU's
> broadcast", the cross-over point must be even smaller. Doing thousands
> of CPU broadcasts is just crazy, even if they are hw-accelerated.
>
> Can't you just do a full invalidate and a SW IPI for larger ranges?
For us, this would be great except ... we can potentially have other
agents with an MMU that only support snooping of the broadcasts...
> And as mentioned, true sparse mappings are actually fairly rare, so
> making extra effort (and data structures) to have individual ranges
> sounds crazy.
>
> Is this some hw-enforced thing? You really can't turn off the
> cross-cpu-for-each-pte braindamage?
Cheers,
Ben.
> Linus
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-28 21:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-28 11:44 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Fix a couple of issues with zap_pte_range and MMU gather Will Deacon
2014-10-28 11:44 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] zap_pte_range: update addr when forcing flush after TLB batching faiure Will Deacon
2014-10-28 15:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-28 16:07 ` Will Deacon
2014-10-28 16:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-28 17:07 ` Will Deacon
2014-10-28 18:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-28 21:16 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2014-10-28 21:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-28 21:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-29 19:47 ` Will Deacon
2014-10-29 21:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-29 21:27 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-11-01 17:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-11-01 20:25 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-11-03 17:56 ` Will Deacon
2014-11-03 18:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-11-04 14:29 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-11-04 16:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-11-06 13:57 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-11-06 17:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-11-06 18:38 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-11-06 21:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-11-07 16:50 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-11-10 13:56 ` Will Deacon
2014-10-28 11:44 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] zap_pte_range: fix partial TLB flushing in response to a dirty pte Will Deacon
2014-10-28 15:18 ` Linus Torvalds
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=1414530994.29180.19.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/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