From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [patch] mm: fix PageUptodate memory ordering bug
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 09:22:17 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.9999.0712230900310.21557@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071223071529.GC29288@wotan.suse.de>
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> It's not actually increasing size by that much here... hmm, do you have
> CONFIG_X86_PPRO_FENCE defined, by any chance?
>
> It looks like this gets defined by default for i386, and also probably for
> distro configs. Linus? This is a fairly heavy hammer for such an unlikely bug on
> such a small number of systems (that admittedly doesn't even fix the bug in all
> cases anyway). It's not only heavy for my proposed patch, but it also halves the
> speed of spinlocks. Can we have some special config option for this instead?
A special config option isn't great, since vendors would probably then
enable it for those old P6's.
But maybe an "alternative()" thing that depends on a CPU capability?
Of course, it definitely *is* true that the number of CPU's that have that
bug _and_ are actually used in SMP environments is probably vanishingly
small. So maybe even vendors don't really care any more, and we could make
the PPRO_FENCE thing a thing of the past.
There's actually a few different PPro errata. There's #51, which is an IO
ordering thing, and can happen on UP too. There's #66, which breaks CPU
ordering, and is SMP-only (and which is probably at least *mostly* fixed
by PPRO_FENCE), and there is #92 which can cause cache incoherency and
where PPRO_FENCE *may* indirectly help.
We could decide to just ignore all of them, or perhaps ignore all but #51.
I think Alan still has an old four-way PPro hidden away somewhere, but
he's probably one of the few people who could even *test* this thing.
Or we could make PPRO_FENCE just be something that you have to enable by
hand, rather than enabling it automatically for a set of CPU's. That way
Alan can add it to his config, and everybody else can clear it if they
decide that they don't have one of the old 200MHz PPro's any more..
Linus
--
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:[~2007-12-23 17:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-18 1:26 Nick Piggin
2007-12-22 8:57 ` Andrew Morton
2007-12-22 12:14 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-12-23 6:54 ` Nick Piggin
2007-12-23 5:57 ` Nick Piggin
2007-12-23 6:32 ` Andrew Morton
2007-12-23 7:15 ` Nick Piggin
2007-12-23 7:29 ` Andrew Morton
2007-12-23 9:14 ` Nick Piggin
2007-12-23 9:28 ` Andrew Morton
2007-12-23 16:02 ` Andi Kleen
2007-12-30 16:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-01 23:26 ` Nick Piggin
2008-01-02 21:01 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-03 3:32 ` Nick Piggin
2008-01-03 13:08 ` Andi Kleen
2007-12-23 17:22 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2007-12-23 21:35 ` Nick Piggin
2007-12-23 22:41 ` Nick Piggin
2008-01-01 23:41 ` Alan Cox
2008-01-02 11:02 ` [patch] i386: avoid expensive ppro ordering workaround for default 686 kernels Nick Piggin
2008-01-02 13:44 ` Alan Cox
2008-01-03 4:17 ` Nick Piggin
2008-01-03 14:23 ` Alan Cox
2008-01-03 20:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-01-03 22:23 ` Alan Cox
2008-01-03 23:10 ` Nick Piggin
2008-01-04 16:27 ` Alan Cox
2008-01-07 0:12 ` Nick Piggin
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=alpine.LFD.0.9999.0712230900310.21557@woody.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
/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