From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-team <kernel-team@fb.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/11] mm,sched: conditionally skip lazy TLB mm refcounting
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 11:12:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180731091248.GS2494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1532999155.28585.56.camel@surriel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 463 bytes --]
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 09:05:55PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-07-30 at 18:26 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > So for ARCH_NO_ACTIVE_MM we never touch ->active_mm and therefore
> > ->active_mm == ->mm.
>
> Close, but not true for kernel threads, which have a
> NULL ->mm, but a non-null ->active_mm that gets passed
> to enter_lazy_tlb().
I'm confused on the need for this. We mark the CPU lazy, why do we still
care about this?
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-31 9:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-28 21:53 [PATCH 0/10] x86,tlb,mm: more lazy TLB cleanups & optimizations Rik van Riel
2018-07-28 21:53 ` [PATCH 01/10] x86,tlb: clarify memory barrier in switch_mm_irqs_off Rik van Riel
2018-07-29 2:59 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-28 21:53 ` [PATCH 02/10] smp: use __cpumask_set_cpu in on_each_cpu_cond Rik van Riel
2018-07-29 2:59 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-28 21:53 ` [PATCH 03/10] smp,cpumask: introduce on_each_cpu_cond_mask Rik van Riel
2018-07-29 2:57 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-29 12:00 ` Rik van Riel
[not found] ` <E710FBA5-CC5E-4941-ACBF-4AB3424F1F68@amacapital.net>
2018-07-29 17:39 ` Rik van Riel
2018-07-29 17:51 ` Rik van Riel
2018-07-29 18:55 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-29 19:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-28 21:53 ` [PATCH 04/10] x86,mm: use on_each_cpu_cond for TLB flushes Rik van Riel
2018-07-29 2:58 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-29 12:02 ` Rik van Riel
2018-07-28 21:53 ` [PATCH 05/10] mm,tlb: turn dummy defines into inline functions Rik van Riel
2018-07-28 21:53 ` [PATCH 06/10] mm,x86: skip cr4 and ldt reload when mm stays the same Rik van Riel
2018-07-29 4:21 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-28 21:53 ` [PATCH 07/10] x86,mm: remove leave_mm cpu argument Rik van Riel
2018-07-28 21:53 ` [PATCH 08/10] arch,mm: add config variable to skip lazy TLB mm refcounting Rik van Riel
2018-07-28 21:53 ` [PATCH 09/10] mm,x86: shoot down lazy TLB references at exit_mmap time Rik van Riel
2018-07-28 21:53 ` [PATCH 10/10] mm,sched: conditionally skip lazy TLB mm refcounting Rik van Riel
2018-07-29 4:21 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-29 12:11 ` Rik van Riel
2018-07-29 15:29 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-29 16:55 ` Rik van Riel
2018-07-29 19:54 ` [PATCH v2 10/11] x86,tlb: really leave mm on shootdown Rik van Riel
2018-07-29 19:54 ` [PATCH v2 11/11] mm,sched: conditionally skip lazy TLB mm refcounting Rik van Riel
2018-07-30 9:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-30 14:30 ` Rik van Riel
2018-07-30 16:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-30 19:15 ` Rik van Riel
2018-07-30 19:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-30 19:36 ` Rik van Riel
2018-07-30 19:49 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-30 21:46 ` Rik van Riel
2018-07-30 22:00 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-31 1:05 ` Rik van Riel
2018-07-31 9:12 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2018-07-31 14:29 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-31 15:03 ` Rik van Riel
2018-07-31 15:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-30 11:32 ` [PATCH 0/10] x86,tlb,mm: more lazy TLB cleanups & optimizations Ingo Molnar
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=20180731091248.GS2494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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