lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jun]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 07/11] x86/mm: Stop calling leave_mm() in idle code
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:22 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2017, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/idle/intel_idle.c b/drivers/idle/intel_idle.c
>> index 216d7ec88c0c..2ae43f59091d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/idle/intel_idle.c
>> +++ b/drivers/idle/intel_idle.c
>> @@ -912,16 +912,15 @@ static __cpuidle int intel_idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
>> struct cpuidle_state *state = &drv->states[index];
>> unsigned long eax = flg2MWAIT(state->flags);
>> unsigned int cstate;
>> - int cpu = smp_processor_id();
>>
>> cstate = (((eax) >> MWAIT_SUBSTATE_SIZE) & MWAIT_CSTATE_MASK) + 1;
>>
>> /*
>> - * leave_mm() to avoid costly and often unnecessary wakeups
>> - * for flushing the user TLB's associated with the active mm.
>> + * NB: if CPUIDLE_FLAG_TLB_FLUSHED is set, this idle transition
>> + * will probably flush the TLB. It's not guaranteed to flush
>> + * the TLB, though, so it's not clear that we can do anything
>> + * useful with this knowledge.
>
> So my understanding here is:
>
> The C-state transition might flush the TLB, when cstate->flags has
> CPUIDLE_FLAG_TLB_FLUSHED set. The idle transition already took the
> CPU out of the set of CPUs which are remotely flushed, so the
> knowledge about this potential flush is not useful for the kernels
> view of the TLB state.

Indeed. I assume the theory behind the old code was that leave_mm()
was expensive and that CPUIDLE_FLAG_TLB_FLUSHED would be a decent
heuristic for when to do it.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-06-21 18:21    [W:0.087 / U:1.244 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site