public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
To: Luming Yu <luming.yu@shingroup.cn>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	mpe@ellerman.id.au, npiggin@gmail.com,
	christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu, jialong.yang@shingroup.cn,
	luming.yu@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] powerpc/tlb: enable arch want batched unmap tlb flush
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2024 10:48:11 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ed5bymlo.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3A7F514D32DFA545+ZvDZF58z6KTRqRjG@HX09040029.powercore.com.cn>

Luming Yu <luming.yu@shingroup.cn> writes:

> On Sun, Sep 22, 2024 at 04:39:53PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
>> Luming Yu <luming.yu@shingroup.cn> writes:
>> 
>> > From: Yu Luming <luming.yu@gmail.com>
>> >
>> > ppc always do its own tracking for batch tlb. By trivially enabling
>> > the ARCH_WANT_BATCHED_UNMAP_TLB_FLUSH in ppc, ppc arch can re-use
>> > common code in rmap and reduce overhead and do optimization it could not
>> > have without a tlb flushing context at low architecture level.
>> 
>> I looked at this patch and other than the compile failure, this patch
>> still won't optimize anything. The idea of this config is that we want
>> to batch all the tlb flush operation at the end. By returning false from
>> should_defer_flush() (in this patch), we are saying we cannot defer
>> the flush and hence we do tlb flush in the same context of unmap.
> not exactly, as false return implies, we currently do nothing but relying on
> book3S_64's tlb batch implementation which contains a bit of defer optimization
> that we need to use a real benchmark to do some performance characterization.
>
> And I need to get my test bed ready for patch testing first. So I have to
> defer the real optimization in this area.
>> 
>> Anyway, I took a quick look at ARCH_WANT_BATCHED_UNMAP_TLB_FLUSH
>> and I have a quick PoC for the same. I will soon post it.
> thanks for picking up the barton for the future collaboration on the
> potential common performance benefits among us for powerpc arch.

Sure Thanks, Luming. 
I have posted this work here [1].

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/cover.1727001426.git.ritesh.list@gmail.com/
-ritesh

      reply	other threads:[~2024-09-23  5:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-09-18  9:25 [RFC PATCH] powerpc/tlb: enable arch want batched unmap tlb flush Luming Yu
2024-09-19  3:22 ` Michael Ellerman
2024-09-19  3:54   ` Luming Yu
2024-09-19 12:52     ` Michael Ellerman
2024-09-22 11:09 ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-09-23  2:57   ` Luming Yu
2024-09-23  5:18     ` Ritesh Harjani [this message]

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=87ed5bymlo.fsf@gmail.com \
    --to=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
    --cc=jialong.yang@shingroup.cn \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=luming.yu@gmail.com \
    --cc=luming.yu@shingroup.cn \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.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