From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Yu, Yu-cheng" <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>,
"riel@surriel.com" <riel@surriel.com>,
"luto@kernel.org" <luto@kernel.org>,
"Hellstrom, Thomas" <thomas.hellstrom@intel.com>,
"Cui, Ling" <ling.cui@intel.com>,
"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"tglx@kernel.org" <tglx@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mm: Revert INVLPGB optimization for set_memory code
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2026 11:46:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c139aa17-fd12-413e-9753-a2dc6f677057@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6ba35878b09adfd0ad47dd6a4bdc55acbc683550.camel@intel.com>
On 4/21/26 11:42, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> Makes sense. And I see the merit in just trying to revert the change. But I
> think a change to fix the optimization is also temptingly small:
Yeah, it is tempting. It's probably what I would have done if this
wasn't easy to revert, or if it wasn't _just_ an optimization.
But once -rc1 hits, we should definitely revisit the optimization.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-21 18:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-21 15:19 [PATCH] x86/mm: Revert INVLPGB optimization for set_memory code Dave Hansen
2026-04-21 15:20 ` Dave Hansen
2026-04-21 15:25 ` Hellstrom, Thomas
2026-04-21 18:42 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2026-04-21 18:46 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2026-04-22 7:59 ` Hellstrom, Thomas
2026-04-22 14:01 ` Dave Hansen
2026-04-22 19:15 ` [tip: x86/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Dave Hansen
2026-04-24 13:46 ` tip-bot2 for Dave Hansen
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=c139aa17-fd12-413e-9753-a2dc6f677057@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ling.cui@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=thomas.hellstrom@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yu-cheng.yu@intel.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