lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jun]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/9] x86/mm/tlb: Flush remote and local TLBs concurrently
Date
> On Jun 25, 2019, at 8:00 PM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/25/19 7:35 PM, Nadav Amit wrote:
>>>> const struct flush_tlb_info *f = info;
>>>> + enum tlb_flush_reason reason;
>>>> +
>>>> + reason = (f->mm == NULL) ? TLB_LOCAL_SHOOTDOWN : TLB_LOCAL_MM_SHOOTDOWN;
>>>
>>> Should we just add the "reason" to flush_tlb_info? It's OK-ish to imply
>>> it like this, but seems like it would be nicer and easier to track down
>>> the origins of these things if we did this at the caller.
>>
>> I prefer not to. I want later to inline flush_tlb_info into the same
>> cacheline that holds call_function_data. Increasing the size of
>> flush_tlb_info for no good reason will not help…
>
> Well, flush_tlb_info is at 6/8ths of a cacheline at the moment.
> call_function_data is 3/8ths. To me, that means we have some slack in
> the size.

I do not understand your math.. :(

6 + 3 > 8 so putting both flush_tlb_info and call_function_data does not
leave us any slack (we can save one qword, so we can actually put them
at the same cacheline).

You can see my current implementation here:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190531063645.4697-4-namit@vmware.com/T/#m0ab5fe0799ba9ff0d41197f1095679fe26aebd57
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190531063645.4697-4-namit@vmware.com/T/#m7b35a93dffd23fbb7ca813c795a0777d4cdcb51b

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-06-26 05:32    [W:0.047 / U:12.488 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site