From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BBC7B7B86 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 07:28:16 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/8xx: fix regression introduced by cache coherency rewrite From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Joakim Tjernlund In-Reply-To: References: <1254212198.5256.0.camel@pasglop> <20090929210331.GA25779@laura.chatsunix.int.mrv.com> <20090930090002.GA2928@compile2.chatsunix.int.mrv.com> <1254350159.5699.21.camel@pasglop> <20091002214949.GA20514@b07421-ec1.am.freescale.net> <1254688118.7122.30.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 07:28:05 +1100 Message-Id: <1254774485.7122.37.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Scott Wood , "linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org" , Rex Feany List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 21:16 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > Ben, for my understanding: It seems to that the TLB Miss routines in > head_32.S are less than optimal as it too touches the pte every time > it hits. Would it not be better to test if ACCESSED and friends are > already set > and skip storing the same pte over and over again? I wouldn't think it's a big deal, but then, the 32-bit hash code has to also update _PAGE_HASHPTE etc... overall I wouldn't touch it for now. However, 8xx should instead look at what I do in recent versions of head_44x.S or what Kumar did in head_fsl_booke.S Cheers, Ben.