linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bpetkov@suse.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/10] x86 TLB flush cleanups, moving toward PCID support
Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 09:36:47 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <469C2BEE-5B6C-4351-8BC9-17796A072964@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1494160201.git.luto@kernel.org>


> On May 7, 2017, at 5:38 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> As I've been working on polishing my PCID code, a major problem I've
> encountered is that there are too many x86 TLB flushing code paths and
> that they have too many inconsequential differences.  The result was
> that earlier versions of the PCID code were a colossal mess and very
> difficult to understand.
> 
> This series goes a long way toward cleaning up the mess.  With all the
> patches applied, there is a single function that contains the meat of
> the code to flush the TLB on a given CPU, and all the tlb flushing
> APIs call it for both local and remote CPUs.
> 
> This series should only adversely affect the kernel in a couple of
> minor ways:
> 
> - It makes smp_mb() unconditional when flushing TLBs.  We used to
>   use the TLB flush itself to mostly avoid smp_mb() on the initiating
>   CPU.
> 
> - On UP kernels, we lose the dubious optimization of inlining nerfed
>   variants of all the TLB flush APIs.  This bloats the kernel a tiny
>   bit, although it should increase performance, since the SMP
>   versions were better.
> 
> Patch 10 in here is a little bit off topic.  It's a cleanup that's
> also needed before PCID can go in, but it's not directly about
> TLB flushing.
> 
> Thoughts?

In general I like the changes. I needed to hack Linux TLB shootdowns for
a research project just because I could not handle the code otherwise.
I ended up doing some of changes that you have done.

I just have two general comments:

- You may want to consider merging the kernel mappings invalidation
  with the userspace mappings invalidations as well, since there are
  still code redundancies.

- Don’t expect too much from concurrent TLB invalidations. In many
  cases the IPI latency dominates the overhead from my experience.

Regards,
Nadav
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-05-08 16:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-07 12:38 Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-07 12:38 ` [RFC 01/10] x86/mm: Reimplement flush_tlb_page() using flush_tlb_mm_range() Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-11 17:41   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-05-12  3:35     ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-07 12:38 ` [RFC 02/10] x86/mm: Reduce indentation in flush_tlb_func() Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-07 12:38 ` [RFC 03/10] x86/mm: Make the batched unmap TLB flush API more generic Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-08 15:34   ` Dave Hansen
2017-05-09 13:02     ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-09 14:39       ` Mel Gorman
2017-05-09 17:13       ` Dave Hansen
2017-05-09 22:54         ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-07 12:38 ` [RFC 04/10] x86/mm: Pass flush_tlb_info to flush_tlb_others() etc Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-11 20:01   ` Nadav Amit
2017-05-12  3:41     ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-07 12:38 ` [RFC 05/10] x86/mm: Change the leave_mm() condition for local TLB flushes Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-07 12:38 ` [RFC 06/10] x86/mm: Refactor flush_tlb_mm_range() to merge local and remote cases Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-07 12:38 ` [RFC 07/10] x86/mm: Use new merged flush logic in arch_tlbbatch_flush() Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-07 12:38 ` [RFC 08/10] x86/mm: Remove the UP tlbflush code; always use the formerly SMP code Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-07 12:38 ` [RFC 09/10] x86/mm: Rework lazy TLB to track the actual loaded mm Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-09 20:41   ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-05-09 22:54     ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-10  5:57     ` Ingo Molnar
2017-05-10  8:19       ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-05-10  8:24         ` Ingo Molnar
2017-05-10 22:42           ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-11  7:13             ` Ingo Molnar
2017-05-12  3:36               ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-07 12:38 ` [RFC 10/10] x86,kvm: Teach KVM's VMX code that CR3 isn't a constant Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-07 13:00 ` [RFC 00/10] x86 TLB flush cleanups, moving toward PCID support Ingo Molnar
2017-05-07 16:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-05-08 16:36 ` Nadav Amit [this message]
2017-05-09 12:43   ` Andy Lutomirski

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=469C2BEE-5B6C-4351-8BC9-17796A072964@gmail.com \
    --to=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bpetkov@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox