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 96BD46B00FD for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 21:30:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from wpaz9.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz9.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.73]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o9T1UROd025974 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:30:29 -0700 Received: from iwn39 (iwn39.prod.google.com [10.241.68.103]) by wpaz9.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o9T1UNiY019437 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:30:26 -0700 Received: by iwn39 with SMTP id 39so3030605iwn.27 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:30:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20101028091158.4de545e9.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <1288200090-23554-1-git-send-email-yinghan@google.com> <4CC869F5.2070405@redhat.com> <20101028091158.4de545e9.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:30:23 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: don't flush TLB when propagate PTE access bit to struct page. From: Ken Chen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: Ying Han , Hugh Dickins , Nick Piggin , Rik van Riel , linux-mm@kvack.org, Minchan Kim , Andrew Morton List-ID: On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 5:11 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > I'd like to vote for batching. Batch mode isn't going to add much value because the effect of accessed bit is already deferred. There are two outcome: (1) the tlb mapping is already flushed due to capacity conflict or (2) process context'ed out. You would want to transfer accessed bit from pte to page table, but flushing TLB on a already deferred operation seems not that useful. - Ken -- 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: email@kvack.org