Re: PCID and TLB flushes (was: [GIT PULL] kdbus for 4.1-rc1)

[Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>]

On 04/28/2015 06:15 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 01:42:10PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> At some point, I'd like to implement PCID on x86 (if no one beats me
>> to it, and this is a low priority for me), which will allow us to skip
>> expensive TLB flushes while context switching.  I have no idea whether
>> ARM can do something similar.
> 
> I talked with Dave about implementing PCID and he thinks that it will be
> net loss. TLB entries will live longer and it means we would need to trigger
> more IPIs to flash them out when we have to. Cost of IPIs will be higher
> than benifit from hot TLB after context switch.

I suspect that may depend on how you do the shootdown.

If, when receiving a TLB shootdown for a non-current PCID, we just flush
all the entries for that PCID and remove the CPU from the mm's
cpu_vm_mask_var, we will never receive more than one shootdown IPI for
a non-current mm, but we will still get the benefits of TLB longevity
when dealing with eg. pipe workloads where tasks take turns running on
the same CPU.

-- 
All rights reversed

--
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>