From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail191.messagelabs.com (mail191.messagelabs.com [216.82.242.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BD528D0039 for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2011 13:56:35 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4D6FE462.4080002@tilera.com> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 13:56:34 -0500 From: Chris Metcalf MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/6] mm: Change flush_tlb_range() to take an mm_struct References: <1299102027.1310.39.camel@laptop> <20110302.134735.260066220.davem@davemloft.net> <4D6FCE5D.4030904@tilera.com> <20110303.104542.104052570.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20110303.104542.104052570.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: David Miller Cc: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, aarcange@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, riel@redhat.com, mingo@elte.hu, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk, mel@csn.ul.ie, npiggin@kernel.dk, rmk@arm.linux.org.uk, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com On 3/3/2011 1:45 PM, David Miller wrote: >> I'm finding it hard to understand how the Sparc code handles icache >> coherence. It seems that the Spitfire MMU is the interesting one, but the >> hard case seems to be when a process migrates around to various cores >> during execution (thus leaving incoherent icache lines everywhere), and the >> page is then freed and re-used for different executable code. I'd think >> that there would have to be xcall IPIs to flush all the cpus' icaches, or >> to flush every core in the cpu_vm_mask plus do something at context switch, >> but I don't see any of that. No doubt I'm missing something :-) > flush_dcache_page() remembers the cpu that wrote to the page (in the > page flags), and cross-calls to that specific cpu. > > It is only that cpu which must flush his I-cache, since all other cpus > saw the write on the bus and updated their I-cache lines as a result. > > See, in the sparc64 case, the incoherency issue is purely local to the > store. The problem case is specifically the local I-cache not seeing > local writes, everything else is fine. CPU I-caches see writes done > by other cpus, just not those done by the local cpu. Thanks, that makes sense. Our architecture has no bus to snoop, so we couldn't take advantage of that approach. -- Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp. http://www.tilera.com -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org