From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>
Cc: Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@bytedance.com>,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, luto@kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org, paulmck@kernel.org, muchun.song@linux.dev,
bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, pbonzini@redhat.com,
clrkwllms@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/12] x86/mm: Move flush_tlb_info back to the stack
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 09:49:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260319084929.T6d0DX1P@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3A5D6EAA-E20D-487E-987C-BA88B98820BD@gmail.com>
On 2026-03-19 00:28:19 [+0200], Nadav Amit wrote:
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> >> index 5a3cdc439e38d..4a7f40c7f939a 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> >> @@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ struct flush_tlb_info {
> >> u8 stride_shift;
> >> u8 freed_tables;
> >> u8 trim_cpumask;
> >> -};
> >> +} __aligned(SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
> >>
> >
> > This would work, but you are likely to encounter the same problem PeterZ hit
> > when I did something similar: in some configurations SMP_CACHE_BYTES is very
> > large.
So if capping to 64 is an option does not break performance where one
would complain, why not. But you did it initially so…
> Further thinking about it and looking at the rest of the series: wouldn’t it be
> simpler to put flush_tlb_info and smp_call_function_many_cond()’s
> cpumask on thread_struct? It would allow to support CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=y
> case by preallocating cpumask on thread creation.
>
> I’m not sure whether the memory overhead is prohibitive.
My Debian config has CONFIG_NR_CPUS=8192 which would add 1KiB if we add
a plain cpumask_t. The allocation based on cpumask_size() would add just
8 bytes/ pointer to the struct which should be fine. We could even stash
the mask in the pointer for CPUs <= 64 on 64bit.
On RT it would be desired to have the memory and not to fallback to
waiting with disabled preemption if the allocation fails.
The flush_tlb_info are around 40 bytes + alignment. Maybe we could try
stack first if this gets us to acceptable performance.
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-19 8:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-18 4:56 [PATCH v3 00/12] Allow preemption during IPI completion waiting to improve real-time performance Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 4:56 ` [PATCH v3 01/12] smp: Disable preemption explicitly in __csd_lock_wait Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 14:13 ` Steven Rostedt
2026-03-18 4:56 ` [PATCH v3 02/12] smp: Enable preemption early in smp_call_function_single Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 14:14 ` Steven Rostedt
2026-03-19 2:30 ` Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 4:56 ` [PATCH v3 03/12] smp: Remove get_cpu from smp_call_function_any Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 14:32 ` Steven Rostedt
2026-03-18 15:39 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-03-18 4:56 ` [PATCH v3 04/12] smp: Use on-stack cpumask in smp_call_function_many_cond Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 14:38 ` Steven Rostedt
2026-03-18 15:55 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-03-19 3:02 ` Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 4:56 ` [PATCH v3 05/12] smp: Free call_function_data via RCU in smpcfd_dead_cpu Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 16:19 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-03-19 7:48 ` Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 4:56 ` [PATCH v3 06/12] smp: Enable preemption early in smp_call_function_many_cond Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 16:55 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-03-19 3:46 ` Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 4:56 ` [PATCH v3 07/12] smp: Remove preempt_disable from smp_call_function Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 4:56 ` [PATCH v3 08/12] smp: Remove preempt_disable from on_each_cpu_cond_mask Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 4:56 ` [PATCH v3 09/12] scftorture: Remove preempt_disable in scftorture_invoke_one Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 4:56 ` [PATCH v3 10/12] x86/mm: Move flush_tlb_info back to the stack Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 17:21 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-03-18 20:24 ` Nadav Amit
2026-03-18 22:28 ` Nadav Amit
2026-03-19 8:49 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2026-03-19 10:37 ` Nadav Amit
2026-03-19 10:58 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-03-19 13:41 ` Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-19 14:40 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-03-20 14:33 ` Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 4:56 ` [PATCH v3 11/12] x86/mm: Enable preemption during native_flush_tlb_multi Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-18 4:56 ` [PATCH v3 12/12] x86/mm: Enable preemption during flush_tlb_kernel_range Chuyi Zhou
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=20260319084929.T6d0DX1P@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=zhouchuyi@bytedance.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