From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
Cc: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>, Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/9] x86/mm/tlb: Flush remote and local TLBs concurrently
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 21:14:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190722191433.GD6698@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190719005837.4150-5-namit@vmware.com>
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 05:58:32PM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote:
> @@ -709,8 +716,9 @@ void native_flush_tlb_others(const struct cpumask *cpumask,
> * doing a speculative memory access.
> */
> if (info->freed_tables) {
> - smp_call_function_many(cpumask, flush_tlb_func_remote,
> - (void *)info, 1);
> + __smp_call_function_many(cpumask, flush_tlb_func_remote,
> + flush_tlb_func_local,
> + (void *)info, 1);
> } else {
> /*
> * Although we could have used on_each_cpu_cond_mask(),
> @@ -737,7 +745,8 @@ void native_flush_tlb_others(const struct cpumask *cpumask,
> if (tlb_is_not_lazy(cpu))
> __cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, cond_cpumask);
> }
> - smp_call_function_many(cond_cpumask, flush_tlb_func_remote,
> + __smp_call_function_many(cond_cpumask, flush_tlb_func_remote,
> + flush_tlb_func_local,
> (void *)info, 1);
> }
> }
Do we really need that _local/_remote distinction? ISTR you had a patch
that frobbed flush_tlb_info into the csd and that gave space
constraints, but I'm not seeing that here (probably a wise, get stuff
merged etc..).
struct __call_single_data {
struct llist_node llist; /* 0 8 */
smp_call_func_t func; /* 8 8 */
void * info; /* 16 8 */
unsigned int flags; /* 24 4 */
/* size: 32, cachelines: 1, members: 4 */
/* padding: 4 */
/* last cacheline: 32 bytes */
};
struct flush_tlb_info {
struct mm_struct * mm; /* 0 8 */
long unsigned int start; /* 8 8 */
long unsigned int end; /* 16 8 */
u64 new_tlb_gen; /* 24 8 */
unsigned int stride_shift; /* 32 4 */
bool freed_tables; /* 36 1 */
/* size: 40, cachelines: 1, members: 6 */
/* padding: 3 */
/* last cacheline: 40 bytes */
};
IIRC what you did was make void *__call_single_data::info the last
member and a union until the full cacheline size (64). Given the above
that would get us 24 bytes for csd, leaving us 40 for that
flush_tlb_info.
But then we can still do something like the below, which doesn't change
things and still gets rid of that dual function crud, simplifying
smp_call_function_many again.
Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h
+++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h
@@ -546,8 +546,9 @@ struct flush_tlb_info {
unsigned long start;
unsigned long end;
u64 new_tlb_gen;
- unsigned int stride_shift;
- bool freed_tables;
+ unsigned int cpu;
+ unsigned short stride_shift;
+ unsigned char freed_tables;
};
#define local_flush_tlb() __flush_tlb()
Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
+++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
@@ -659,6 +659,27 @@ static void flush_tlb_func_remote(void *
flush_tlb_func_common(f, false, TLB_REMOTE_SHOOTDOWN);
}
+static void flush_tlb_func(void *info)
+{
+ const struct flush_tlb_info *f = info;
+ enum tlb_flush_reason reason = TLB_REMOTE_SHOOTDOWN;
+ bool local = false;
+
+ if (f->cpu == smp_processor_id()) {
+ local = true;
+ reason = (f->mm == NULL) ? TLB_LOCAL_SHOOTDOWN : TLB_LOCAL_MM_SHOOTDOWN;
+ } else {
+ inc_irq_stat(irq_tlb_count);
+
+ if (f->mm && f->mm != this_cpu_read(cpu_tlbstate.loaded_mm))
+ return;
+
+ count_vm_tlb_event(NR_TLB_REMOTE_FLUSH_RECEIVED);
+ }
+
+ flush_tlb_func_common(f, local, reason);
+}
+
static bool tlb_is_not_lazy(int cpu)
{
return !per_cpu(cpu_tlbstate_shared.is_lazy, cpu);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-22 19:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20190719005837.4150-1-namit@vmware.com>
2019-07-19 0:58 ` [PATCH v3 4/9] x86/mm/tlb: Flush remote and local TLBs concurrently Nadav Amit via Virtualization
2019-07-19 21:36 ` [PATCH v3 0/9] x86: Concurrent TLB flushes Dave Hansen
[not found] ` <20190719005837.4150-5-namit@vmware.com>
2019-07-22 19:14 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2019-07-22 19:27 ` [PATCH v3 4/9] x86/mm/tlb: Flush remote and local TLBs concurrently Nadav Amit via Virtualization
[not found] ` <58DA0841-33C2-4D16-A671-08064A15001C@vmware.com>
2019-07-22 19:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26 7:28 ` Juergen Gross
2019-07-31 0:13 ` Michael Kelley via Virtualization
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=20190722191433.GD6698@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=haiyangz@microsoft.com \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namit@vmware.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=sthemmin@microsoft.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).