virtualization.lists.linux-foundation.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@vmware.com>,
	Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@lists.osdl.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] i386 - pte update optimizations
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:24:37 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <461EE9E5.6060403@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <461EDBF1.4080904@zytor.com>

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Zachary Amsden wrote:
>> Some PTE optimizations for native and paravirt-ops kernels; this
>> provides a huge win for shadow mode hypervisors and gets rid of
>> some unnecessary atomic instructions in native kernels, saving
>> even more on UP by getting rid of implicit LOCK on xchg instruction.
>
> You do know that P6 and higher don't do locked bus references as long 
> as the value is in the cache, right?

Yes.  Even then, last time I clocked instructions, xchg was still slower 
than read / write, although I could be misremembering.  And it's not 
totally clear that they will always be in cached state, however, and for 
SMP, we still want to drop the implicit lock in cases where the 
processor might not know they are cached exclusive, but we know there 
are no other racing users.  And there are plenty of old processors out 
there to still make it worthwhile.

Zach

  reply	other threads:[~2007-04-13  2:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-04-12  5:30 [PATCH 0/4] i386 - pte update optimizations Zachary Amsden
2007-04-13  1:25 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-04-13  2:24   ` Zachary Amsden [this message]
2007-04-13  6:00     ` Eric Dumazet
2007-04-13  6:25       ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-04-13  9:31     ` Keir Fraser
2007-04-13 12:27       ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-13 11:31         ` Keir Fraser
2007-04-13 15:34           ` H. Peter Anvin

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=461EE9E5.6060403@vmware.com \
    --to=zach@vmware.com \
    --cc=ak@muc.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=chrisw@sous-sol.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=hugh@veritas.com \
    --cc=jeremy@goop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.osdl.org \
    --cc=walken@vmware.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).