lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jun]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 8/9] x86/tlb: Privatize cpu_tlbstate
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 2:52 PM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/12/19 11:48 PM, Nadav Amit wrote:
> > cpu_tlbstate is mostly private and only the variable is_lazy is shared.
> > This causes some false-sharing when TLB flushes are performed.
>
> Presumably, all CPUs doing TLB flushes read 'is_lazy'. Because of this,
> when we write to it we have to do the cache coherency dance to get rid
> of all the CPUs that might have a read-only copy.
>
> I would have *thought* that we only do writes when we enter or exist
> lazy mode. That's partially true. We do write in enter_lazy_tlb(), but
> we also *unconditionally* write in switch_mm_irqs_off(). That seems
> like it might be responsible for a chunk (or even a vast majority) of
> the cacheline bounces.
>
> Is there anything preventing us from turning the switch_mm_irqs_off()
> write into:
>
> if (was_lazy)
> this_cpu_write(cpu_tlbstate.is_lazy, false);
>
> ?
>
> I think this patch is probably still a good general idea, but I just
> wonder if reducing the writes is a better way to reduce bounces.

Good catch! I'm usually pretty good about this for
test_and_set()-style things, but I totally missed this obvious
unnecessary write when I did this. I hereby apologize for all the
cycles I wasted :)

--Andy

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-06-26 05:59    [W:0.070 / U:12.016 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site