[lkml]   [2017]   [Jul]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 00/10] PCID and improved laziness
On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 10:56:57AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Andy Lutomirski <> wrote:
> > *** Ingo, even if this misses 4.13, please apply the first patch before
> > *** the merge window.
> > Andy Lutomirski (10):
> > x86/mm: Don't reenter flush_tlb_func_common()
> > x86/mm: Delete a big outdated comment about TLB flushing
> > x86/mm: Give each mm TLB flush generation a unique ID
> > x86/mm: Track the TLB's tlb_gen and update the flushing algorithm
> > x86/mm: Rework lazy TLB mode and TLB freshness tracking
> > x86/mm: Stop calling leave_mm() in idle code
> > x86/mm: Disable PCID on 32-bit kernels
> > x86/mm: Add nopcid to turn off PCID
> > x86/mm: Enable CR4.PCIDE on supported systems
> > x86/mm: Try to preserve old TLB entries using PCID
> So this series is really nice, and the first two patches are already upstream, and
> I've just applied all but the final patch to tip:x86/mm (out of caution - I'm a wimp).
> That should already offer some improvements and enables the CR4 bit - but doesn't
> actually use the PCID hardware yet.
> I'll push it all out when it passes testing.
> If it's all super stable I plan to tempt Linus with a late merge window pull
> request for all these preparatory patches. (Unless he objects that is. Hint, hint.)
> Any objections?

What was the final verdict here? I have a patch ready that should be layered
on top which will need a backport. PCID support does not appear to have
made it in this merge window so I'm wondering if I should send the patch
as-is for placement on top of Andy's work or go with the backport and
apply a follow-on patch after Andy's work gets merged.


Mel Gorman

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-07-17 11:58    [W:0.285 / U:0.096 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site