lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [benchmark] 1% performance overhead of paravirt_ops on native kernels
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 09:26:47AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Nick Piggin wrote:
> >
> > The idea seems nice but isn't the problem that kmap gives back a
> > basically 1st class kernel virtual memory? (ie. it can then be used
> > by any other CPU at any point without it having to use kmap?).
>
> No, everybody has to use kmap()/kunmap().

So it is strictly a bug to expose a pointer returned by kmap to
another CPU? That would make it easier, although it would need
to remove the global bit I think so when one task migrates CPUs
then the entry will be flushed and reloaded properly.


> The "problem" is that you could in theory run out of kmap frames, since if
> everybody does a kmap() in an interruptible context and you have lots and
> lots of threads doing different pages, you'd run out. But that has nothing
> to do with kmap_atomic(), which is basically limited to just the number of
> CPU's and a (very small) level of nesting.

This could be avoided with an anti-deadlock pool. If a task
attempts a nested kmap and already holds a kmap, then give it
exclusive access to this pool until it releases its last
nested kmap.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-09 18:49    [W:0.087 / U:11.636 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site