linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Cc: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Rohit Seth <rohitseth@google.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, agl@us.ibm.com, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: update_mmu_cache vs. lazy_mmu_prot_update
Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 15:12:10 +0100 (BST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0605241453340.12355@blonde.wat.veritas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0605231433001.11697@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>

On Tue, 23 May 2006, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 23 May 2006, Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
> 
> > My memory recollects that it was done just like what you suggested:
> > overloading update_mmu_cache for ia64, but it was vetoed by several mm
> > experts.  And as a result a new function was introduced.
> 
> lazy_mmu_prot_update is always called after update_mmu_cache except
> when we change permissions (hugetlb_change_protection() and 
> change_pte_range()). 
> 
> So if we conflate those two then arches may have to be updated to avoid 
> flushing the mmu if we only modified protections.

Ah, I missed those two lone usages of lazy_mmu_prot_update, thanks.
That makes sense, and fits with Ken's recollection: to have added
update_mmu_cache in those two places would have slowed down the
other architectures.

> I think update_mmu_cache() should be dropped in page_wrprotect_one() in 
> order to be consistent scheme. And avoiding mmu flushes will increase the 
> performance of page_wrprotect_one.. lazy_mmu_prot_update must be there 
> since we are changing permissions.

Agreed.

I'd still like to rename lazy_mmu_prot_update, and refactor it, but
that can be a later unrelated cleanup.  What makes sense to me is to
call it update_mmu_cache_prot, and #define the ia64 update_mmu_cache
to that: so we can unclutter common code from most of the
lazy_mmu_prot_update lines, leaving just those two significant
instances of update_mmu_cache_prot that you highlight.

And of the two instances of update_mmu_cache in mm/fremap.c:
it seems to me that the first, in install_page, ought to have a
lazy_mmu_prot_update (and will get it automatically by the #define
I suggest); whereas the second, in install_file_pte, ought not to
have an update_mmu_cache since it's installing a !present entry.

Hugh

--
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:[~2006-05-24 14:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-05-22 19:31 tracking dirty pages patches Hugh Dickins
2006-05-22 20:29 ` Andrew Morton
2006-05-23  8:17   ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-23 14:55   ` Hugh Dickins
2006-05-23 16:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-05-23 19:21   ` Hugh Dickins
2006-05-23 19:31     ` Christoph Lameter
2006-05-23 20:34       ` Hugh Dickins
2006-05-23 21:16         ` Christoph Lameter
2006-05-23 21:17         ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-05-23 21:40           ` update_mmu_cache vs. lazy_mmu_prot_update Christoph Lameter
2006-05-24 14:12             ` Hugh Dickins [this message]
2006-05-23 22:28         ` remove VM_LOCKED before remap_pfn_range and drop VM_SHM Christoph Lameter
2006-05-24 14:57           ` Hugh Dickins
2006-05-24  2:25         ` tracking dirty pages patches Arjan van de Ven
2006-05-24 15:10           ` Hugh Dickins
2006-05-25  2:26             ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-05-23 16:41 ` David Howells
2006-05-23 23:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2006-05-24 14:20   ` Hugh Dickins

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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0605241453340.12355@blonde.wat.veritas.com \
    --to=hugh@veritas.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=agl@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=clameter@sgi.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=rohitseth@google.com \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.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