lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Nov]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/2] "big hammer" for DAX msync/fsync correctness
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 11/06/15 15:17, Dan Williams wrote:
> >>
> >> Is it really required to do that on all cpus?
> >
> > I believe it is, but I'll double check.
> >
>
> It's required on all CPUs on which the DAX memory may have been dirtied.
> This is similar to the way we flush TLBs.

Right. And that's exactly the problem: "may have been dirtied"

If DAX is used on 50% of the CPUs and the other 50% are plumming away
happily in user space or run low latency RT tasks w/o ever touching
it, then having an unconditional flush on ALL CPUs is just wrong
because you penalize the uninvolved cores with a completely pointless
SMP function call and drain their caches.

Thanks,

tglx


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-11-07 08:21    [W:0.059 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site