From: Linu Cherian <linu.cherian@arm.com>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 11/13] arm64: mm: More flags for __flush_tlb_range()
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2026 08:51:22 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aV3RMohRCvzWnuwI@a079125.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251216144601.2106412-12-ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Ryan,
On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 02:45:56PM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> Refactor function variants with "_nosync", "_local" and "_nonotify" into
> a single __always_inline implementation that takes flags and rely on
> constant folding to select the parts that are actually needed at any
> given callsite, based on the provided flags.
>
> Flags all live in the tlbf_t (TLB flags) type; TLBF_NONE (0) continues
> to provide the strongest semantics (i.e. evict from walk cache,
> broadcast, synchronise and notify). Each flag reduces the strength in
> some way; TLBF_NONOTIFY, TLBF_NOSYNC and TLBF_NOBROADCAST are added to
> complement the existing TLBF_NOWALKCACHE.
It would be nice to have some notes added on the below for better clarity
* What a walk cache is and why we bother about them ?
* Why and how should we invalidate the walk caches ?
--
Linu Cherian.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-07 3:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-16 14:45 [PATCH v1 00/13] arm64: Refactor TLB invalidation API and implementation Ryan Roberts
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 01/13] arm64: mm: Re-implement the __tlbi_level macro as a C function Ryan Roberts
2025-12-16 17:53 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-02 14:18 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-01-05 5:30 ` Linu Cherian
2026-01-05 17:09 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 02/13] arm64: mm: Introduce a C wrapper for by-range TLB invalidation Ryan Roberts
2026-01-05 5:33 ` Linu Cherian
2026-01-05 17:12 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 03/13] arm64: mm: Implicitly invalidate user ASID based on TLBI operation Ryan Roberts
2025-12-16 18:01 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-02 14:20 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-12-18 6:30 ` Linu Cherian
2025-12-18 7:05 ` Linu Cherian
2025-12-18 15:47 ` Linu Cherian
2026-01-02 14:30 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-01-05 13:03 ` Linu Cherian
2026-01-05 5:34 ` Linu Cherian
2026-01-05 17:13 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 04/13] arm64: mm: Push __TLBI_VADDR() into __tlbi_level() Ryan Roberts
2026-01-05 5:35 ` Linu Cherian
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 05/13] arm64: mm: Inline __TLBI_VADDR_RANGE() into __tlbi_range() Ryan Roberts
2026-01-05 5:35 ` Linu Cherian
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 06/13] arm64: mm: Re-implement the __flush_tlb_range_op macro in C Ryan Roberts
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 07/13] arm64: mm: Simplify __TLBI_RANGE_NUM() macro Ryan Roberts
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 08/13] arm64: mm: Simplify __flush_tlb_range_limit_excess() Ryan Roberts
2025-12-17 8:12 ` Dev Jain
2026-01-02 15:23 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 09/13] arm64: mm: Refactor flush_tlb_page() to use __tlbi_level_asid() Ryan Roberts
2026-01-06 3:25 ` Linu Cherian
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 10/13] arm64: mm: Refactor __flush_tlb_range() to take flags Ryan Roberts
2026-01-06 4:51 ` Linu Cherian
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 11/13] arm64: mm: More flags for __flush_tlb_range() Ryan Roberts
2026-01-06 15:28 ` Linu Cherian
2026-01-12 11:52 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-01-07 3:21 ` Linu Cherian [this message]
2026-01-12 12:00 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 12/13] arm64: mm: Wrap flush_tlb_page() around ___flush_tlb_range() Ryan Roberts
2026-01-07 9:57 ` Linu Cherian
2025-12-16 14:45 ` [PATCH v1 13/13] arm64: mm: Provide level hint for flush_tlb_page() Ryan Roberts
2026-01-07 14:44 ` Linu Cherian
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=aV3RMohRCvzWnuwI@a079125.arm.com \
--to=linu.cherian@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=will@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