linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: PCID and TLB flushes (was: [GIT PULL] kdbus for 4.1-rc1)
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 18:56:29 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5540101D.7020800@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrUYc0W49-CVFpsj33CQx0N_ssaQeree3S7Zh3aisr3kNw@mail.gmail.com>

On 04/28/2015 06:54 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> I had a totally different implementation idea in mind.  It goes
> something like this:
> 
> For each CPU, we allocate a fixed number of PCIDs, e.g. 0-7.  We have
> a per-cpu array of the mm [1] that owns each PCID.  On context switch,
> we look up the new mm in the array and, if there's a PCID mapped, we
> switch cr3 and select that PCID.  If there is no PCID mapped, we
> choose one (LRU?  clock replacement?), switch cr3 and select and
> invalidate that PCID.
> 
> When it's time to invalidate a TLB entry on an mm that's active
> remotely, we really don't want to send an IPI to a CPU that doesn't
> actually have that mm active.  Instead we bump some kind of generation
> counter in the mm_struct that will cause the next switch to that mm
> not to match the PCID list.  To keep this working, I think we also
> need to update the per-cpu PCID list with our generation counter
> either when we context switch out or when we process a TLB shootdown
> IPI.

If we do that, we can also get rid of TLB shootdowns for
idle CPUs in lazy TLB mode.

Very nice, if the details work out.

-- 
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2015-04-28 22:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-28 22:15 Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-04-28 22:38 ` Dave Hansen
2015-04-28 22:41 ` Rik van Riel
2015-04-28 22:54   ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-04-28 22:56     ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2015-04-28 23:01       ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-04-28 23:19         ` Linus Torvalds
2015-04-28 23:16     ` Linus Torvalds
2015-04-28 23:23       ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-04-28 23:38         ` Linus Torvalds
2015-04-28 23:49           ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-04-28 22:56 ` Linus Torvalds

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=5540101D.7020800@redhat.com \
    --to=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --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