From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46113) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g731b-0006B4-Ry for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2018 14:34:32 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g731X-0004zx-St for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2018 14:34:31 -0400 Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]:39461) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g731X-0004zH-LF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2018 14:34:27 -0400 Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2018 14:34:23 -0400 From: "Emilio G. Cota" Message-ID: <20181001183423.GA27555@flamenco> References: <20180919175423.GA25553@flamenco> <87va71uijc.fsf@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87va71uijc.fsf@linaro.org> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] ideas for improving TLB performance (help with TCG backend wanted) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alex =?iso-8859-1?Q?Benn=E9e?= Cc: qemu-devel , Pranith Kumar , Richard Henderson On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 01:19:51 +0100, Alex Bennée wrote: > If we are going to have an indirection then we can also drop the > requirement to scale the TLB according to the number of MMU indexes we > have to support. It's fairly wasteful when a bunch of them are almost > never used unless you are running stuff that uses them. So with dynamic TLB sizing, what you're suggesting here is to resize each MMU array independently (depending on their use rate) instead of using a single "TLB size" for all MMU indexes. Am I understanding your point correctly? Thanks, E.