From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Mallick\,
Asit K" <asit.k.mallick@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] x86, mm: avoid stale tlb entries by clearing prev mm_cpumask after switching mm
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 17:23:53 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m2d3n9ap1y.fsf@firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1296677247.4418.103.camel@sbsiddha-MOBL3.sc.intel.com> (Suresh Siddha's message of "Wed, 02 Feb 2011 12:07:27 -0800")
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com> writes:
> For the prev mm that is handing over the cpu to another mm, clear the cpu
> from the mm_cpumask(prev) after the cr3 is changed.
>
> Otherwise, clearing the mm_cpumask early will avoid the flush tlb IPI's while
> the cr3 and TLB's are still pointing to the prev mm. And this window can lead
> to the stale (global) TLB entries.
>
> Marking it for -stable, though we haven't seen any reported failure that
> can be attributed to this.
Would it be safer to add a memory barrier between the load_cr3 and the
cpumask_clear_cpu()? As far as I can see cpumask_clear_cpu doesn't
imply a general one and load_cr3 doesn't either. There's this
__force_order hack in system.h, but I don't think it will enforce
order here.
-Andi
--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-03 1:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-02 20:07 [patch] x86, mm: avoid stale tlb entries by clearing prev mm_cpumask after switching mm Suresh Siddha
2011-02-03 1:23 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2011-02-03 1:55 ` Suresh Siddha
2011-02-03 2:15 ` Andi Kleen
2011-02-03 4:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-03 4:22 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-02-03 1:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-03 4:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-03 18:27 ` Suresh Siddha
2011-02-03 19:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-03 19:34 ` Suresh Siddha
2011-02-03 19:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-03 20:20 ` Suresh Siddha
2011-02-03 21:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-02-03 21:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-03 21:39 ` Ingo Molnar
[not found] <BLU157-w495F35A445E063E33DC9E8DAAC0@phx.gbl>
[not found] ` <BLU157-w41A610FD3413183801060CDAAC0@phx.gbl>
[not found] ` <BLU157-w548B9D2F8EDD8CA9DB6CD3DAAC0@phx.gbl>
2011-04-15 11:58 ` MaoXiaoyun
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=m2d3n9ap1y.fsf@firstfloor.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=asit.k.mallick@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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