From: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
To: David Nellans <david@nellans.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"riel@redhat.com" <riel@redhat.com>,
"mgorman@suse.de" <mgorman@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] x86: mm: set TLB flush tunable to sane value (33)
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 11:24:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53B44E4E.6020706@sr71.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53B44C9A.9070808@nellans.org>
On 07/02/2014 11:16 AM, David Nellans wrote:
> Intuition here is that invalidate caused refills will almost always
> be serviced from the L2 or better since we've recently walked to
> modify the page needing flush and thus pre-warmed the caches for any
> refill? Or is this an artifact of the flush/refill test setup?
There are lots of caches in place, not just the CPU's normal L1/2/3
memory caches. See "4.10.3 Paging-Structure Caches" in the Intel SDM.
I _believe_ TLB misses can be serviced from these caches and their
purpose is to avoid going out to memory (or the memory caches).
So I think the effect that we're seeing is from _all_ of the caches,
plus prefetching. If you start a prefetch for a TLB miss before you
actually start to run the instruction needing the TLB entry, you will
pay less than the entire cost of going out to memory (or the memory caches).
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-02 18:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-01 16:48 [PATCH 0/7] [RESEND][v4] x86: rework tlb range flushing code Dave Hansen
2014-07-01 16:48 ` [PATCH 1/7] x86: mm: clean up tlb " Dave Hansen
2014-07-01 16:48 ` [PATCH 2/7] x86: mm: rip out complicated, out-of-date, buggy TLB flushing Dave Hansen
2014-07-01 16:48 ` [PATCH 3/7] x86: mm: fix missed global TLB flush stat Dave Hansen
2014-07-01 16:48 ` [PATCH 4/7] x86: mm: unify remote invlpg code Dave Hansen
2014-07-01 16:48 ` [PATCH 5/7] x86: mm: add tracepoints for TLB flushes Dave Hansen
2014-07-01 16:48 ` [PATCH 6/7] x86: mm: new tunable for single vs full TLB flush Dave Hansen
2014-07-01 16:48 ` [PATCH 7/7] x86: mm: set TLB flush tunable to sane value (33) Dave Hansen
2014-07-02 18:16 ` David Nellans
2014-07-02 18:24 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2014-07-02 19:04 ` [PATCH 0/7] [RESEND][v4] x86: rework tlb range flushing code Davidlohr Bueso
2014-07-31 15:40 Dave Hansen
2014-07-31 15:41 ` [PATCH 7/7] x86: mm: set TLB flush tunable to sane value (33) Dave Hansen
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=53B44E4E.6020706@sr71.net \
--to=dave@sr71.net \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=david@nellans.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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