[patch 3/5]thp: add tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry

[patch 3/5]thp: add tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry

[Shaohua Li]

We have tlb_remove_tlb_entry to indicate a pte tlb flush entry should be
flushed, but not a corresponding API for pmd entry. This isn't a problem so far
because THP is only for x86 currently and tlb_flush() under x86 will flush
entire TLB. But thsi is confusion and could be missed if thp is ported to
other arch.

Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
---
 arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h |    1 +
 include/asm-generic/tlb.h  |   10 ++++++++++
 include/linux/huge_mm.h    |    2 +-
 mm/huge_memory.c           |    3 ++-
 mm/memory.c                |    2 +-
 5 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Index: linux/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:00:39.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:02:52.000000000 +0800
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
 #define tlb_start_vma(tlb, vma) do { } while (0)
 #define tlb_end_vma(tlb, vma) do { } while (0)
 #define __tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, ptep, address) do { } while (0)
+#define __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address) do { } while (0)
 #define tlb_flush(tlb) flush_tlb_mm((tlb)->mm)
 
 #include <asm-generic/tlb.h>
Index: linux/include/asm-generic/tlb.h
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/include/asm-generic/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:00:23.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/include/asm-generic/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:18:01.000000000 +0800
@@ -139,6 +139,16 @@ static inline void tlb_remove_page(struc
 		__tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, ptep, address);	\
 	} while (0)
 
+#ifndef __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry
+#define __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address) do {} while(0)
+#endif
+
+#define tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address)		\
+	do {							\
+		tlb->need_flush = 1;				\
+		__tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address);	\
+	} while (0)
+
 #define pte_free_tlb(tlb, ptep, address)			\
 	do {							\
 		tlb->need_flush = 1;				\
Index: linux/include/linux/huge_mm.h
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/include/linux/huge_mm.h	2011-10-25 09:07:12.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/include/linux/huge_mm.h	2011-10-25 09:07:44.000000000 +0800
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ extern struct page *follow_trans_huge_pm
 					  unsigned int flags);
 extern int zap_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
 			struct vm_area_struct *vma,
-			pmd_t *pmd);
+			pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr);
 extern int mincore_huge_pmd(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
 			unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
 			unsigned char *vec);
Index: linux/mm/huge_memory.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/mm/huge_memory.c	2011-10-25 09:00:07.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/mm/huge_memory.c	2011-10-25 09:06:55.000000000 +0800
@@ -1005,7 +1005,7 @@ out:
 }
 
 int zap_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
-		 pmd_t *pmd)
+		 pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr)
 {
 	int ret = 0;
 
@@ -1021,6 +1021,7 @@ int zap_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
 			pgtable = get_pmd_huge_pte(tlb->mm);
 			page = pmd_page(*pmd);
 			pmd_clear(pmd);
+			tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmd, addr);
 			page_remove_rmap(page);
 			VM_BUG_ON(page_mapcount(page) < 0);
 			add_mm_counter(tlb->mm, MM_ANONPAGES, -HPAGE_PMD_NR);
Index: linux/mm/memory.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/mm/memory.c	2011-10-25 09:07:49.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/mm/memory.c	2011-10-25 09:08:29.000000000 +0800
@@ -1231,7 +1231,7 @@ static inline unsigned long zap_pmd_rang
 			if (next-addr != HPAGE_PMD_SIZE) {
 				VM_BUG_ON(!rwsem_is_locked(&tlb->mm->mmap_sem));
 				split_huge_page_pmd(vma->vm_mm, pmd);
-			} else if (zap_huge_pmd(tlb, vma, pmd))
+			} else if (zap_huge_pmd(tlb, vma, pmd, addr))
 				continue;
 			/* fall through */
 		}

Re: [patch 3/5]thp: add tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry

[Andrea Arcangeli]

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:59:31AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> Index: linux/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:00:39.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:02:52.000000000 +0800
> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>  #define tlb_start_vma(tlb, vma) do { } while (0)
>  #define tlb_end_vma(tlb, vma) do { } while (0)
>  #define __tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, ptep, address) do { } while (0)
> +#define __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address) do { } while (0)
>  #define tlb_flush(tlb) flush_tlb_mm((tlb)->mm)

This is superfluous, it's already define below as noop.

>  
>  #include <asm-generic/tlb.h>
> Index: linux/include/asm-generic/tlb.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/include/asm-generic/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:00:23.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux/include/asm-generic/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:18:01.000000000 +0800
> @@ -139,6 +139,16 @@ static inline void tlb_remove_page(struc
>  		__tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, ptep, address);	\
>  	} while (0)
>  
> +#ifndef __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry
> +#define __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address) do {} while(0)
> +#endif
> +
> +#define tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address)		\
> +	do {							\
> +		tlb->need_flush = 1;				\
> +		__tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address);	\
> +	} while (0)

this looks weird, why do we set need_flush = 1 again, considering that
we're doing tlb_remove_page() just a few lines later (which also sets
tlb->need_flush = 1).

Ok that other archs may need the __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry to be
called (and I've no idea why), but the need_flush = 1 seems
unnecessary.

Why other archs need the __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry to be called?

One way to go would be to change the tlb->need_flush = 1 in
__tlb_remove_page to a VM_BUG_ON(!tlb->need_flush) and then we keep it
above and we add the __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry call.

Or is there any place where __tlb_remove_page is called without a
tlb_remove_*tlb_entry being called before it?

In any case the VM_BUG_ON will verify this.

> Index: linux/include/linux/huge_mm.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/include/linux/huge_mm.h	2011-10-25 09:07:12.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux/include/linux/huge_mm.h	2011-10-25 09:07:44.000000000 +0800
> @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ extern struct page *follow_trans_huge_pm
>  					  unsigned int flags);
>  extern int zap_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
>  			struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> -			pmd_t *pmd);
> +			pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr);
>  extern int mincore_huge_pmd(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
>  			unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  			unsigned char *vec);
> Index: linux/mm/huge_memory.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/mm/huge_memory.c	2011-10-25 09:00:07.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux/mm/huge_memory.c	2011-10-25 09:06:55.000000000 +0800
> @@ -1005,7 +1005,7 @@ out:
>  }
>  
>  int zap_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> -		 pmd_t *pmd)
> +		 pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr)
>  {
>  	int ret = 0;
>  
> @@ -1021,6 +1021,7 @@ int zap_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
>  			pgtable = get_pmd_huge_pte(tlb->mm);
>  			page = pmd_page(*pmd);
>  			pmd_clear(pmd);
> +			tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmd, addr);
>  			page_remove_rmap(page);
>  			VM_BUG_ON(page_mapcount(page) < 0);
>  			add_mm_counter(tlb->mm, MM_ANONPAGES, -HPAGE_PMD_NR);
> Index: linux/mm/memory.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/mm/memory.c	2011-10-25 09:07:49.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux/mm/memory.c	2011-10-25 09:08:29.000000000 +0800
> @@ -1231,7 +1231,7 @@ static inline unsigned long zap_pmd_rang
>  			if (next-addr != HPAGE_PMD_SIZE) {
>  				VM_BUG_ON(!rwsem_is_locked(&tlb->mm->mmap_sem));
>  				split_huge_page_pmd(vma->vm_mm, pmd);
> -			} else if (zap_huge_pmd(tlb, vma, pmd))
> +			} else if (zap_huge_pmd(tlb, vma, pmd, addr))
>  				continue;
>  			/* fall through */
>  		}

Rest looks ok.

Re: [patch 3/5]thp: add tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry

[Shaohua Li]

On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 23:36 +0800, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:59:31AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > Index: linux/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux.orig/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:00:39.000000000 +0800
> > +++ linux/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:02:52.000000000 +0800
> > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> >  #define tlb_start_vma(tlb, vma) do { } while (0)
> >  #define tlb_end_vma(tlb, vma) do { } while (0)
> >  #define __tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, ptep, address) do { } while (0)
> > +#define __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address) do { } while (0)
> >  #define tlb_flush(tlb) flush_tlb_mm((tlb)->mm)
> 
> This is superfluous, it's already define below as noop.
> 
> >  
> >  #include <asm-generic/tlb.h>
> > Index: linux/include/asm-generic/tlb.h
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux.orig/include/asm-generic/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:00:23.000000000 +0800
> > +++ linux/include/asm-generic/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:18:01.000000000 +0800
> > @@ -139,6 +139,16 @@ static inline void tlb_remove_page(struc
> >  		__tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, ptep, address);	\
> >  	} while (0)
> >  
> > +#ifndef __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry
> > +#define __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address) do {} while(0)
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +#define tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address)		\
> > +	do {							\
> > +		tlb->need_flush = 1;				\
> > +		__tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address);	\
> > +	} while (0)
> 
> this looks weird, why do we set need_flush = 1 again, considering that
> we're doing tlb_remove_page() just a few lines later (which also sets
> tlb->need_flush = 1).
> 
> Ok that other archs may need the __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry to be
> called (and I've no idea why), but the need_flush = 1 seems
> unnecessary.
> 
> Why other archs need the __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry to be called?
> 
> One way to go would be to change the tlb->need_flush = 1 in
> __tlb_remove_page to a VM_BUG_ON(!tlb->need_flush) and then we keep it
> above and we add the __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry call.
> 
> Or is there any place where __tlb_remove_page is called without a
> tlb_remove_*tlb_entry being called before it?
> 
> In any case the VM_BUG_ON will verify this.
ok, I made the whole tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry() noop now. we don't need
add anything on it for x86 currently. We can change it later if
necessary.


We have tlb_remove_tlb_entry to indicate a pte tlb flush entry should be
flushed, but not a corresponding API for pmd entry. This isn't a problem so far
because THP is only for x86 currently and tlb_flush() under x86 will flush
entire TLB. But this is confusion and could be missed if thp is ported to
other arch.

Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
---
 include/asm-generic/tlb.h |    6 ++++++
 include/linux/huge_mm.h   |    2 +-
 mm/huge_memory.c          |    3 ++-
 mm/memory.c               |    2 +-
 4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Index: linux/include/asm-generic/tlb.h
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/include/asm-generic/tlb.h	2011-11-11 14:26:33.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/include/asm-generic/tlb.h	2011-11-11 14:26:35.000000000 +0800
@@ -139,6 +139,12 @@ static inline void tlb_remove_page(struc
 		__tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, ptep, address);	\
 	} while (0)
 
+/**
+ * tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry - remember a pmd mapping for later tlb invalidation
+ * This is a nop so far, because only x86 needs it.
+ */
+#define tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address) do {} while (0)
+
 #define pte_free_tlb(tlb, ptep, address)			\
 	do {							\
 		tlb->need_flush = 1;				\
Index: linux/include/linux/huge_mm.h
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/include/linux/huge_mm.h	2011-11-11 14:26:33.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/include/linux/huge_mm.h	2011-11-11 14:26:35.000000000 +0800
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ extern struct page *follow_trans_huge_pm
 					  unsigned int flags);
 extern int zap_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
 			struct vm_area_struct *vma,
-			pmd_t *pmd);
+			pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr);
 extern int mincore_huge_pmd(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
 			unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
 			unsigned char *vec);
Index: linux/mm/huge_memory.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/mm/huge_memory.c	2011-11-11 14:26:33.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/mm/huge_memory.c	2011-11-11 14:26:35.000000000 +0800
@@ -1026,7 +1026,7 @@ out:
 }
 
 int zap_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
-		 pmd_t *pmd)
+		 pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr)
 {
 	int ret = 0;
 
@@ -1042,6 +1042,7 @@ int zap_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
 			pgtable = get_pmd_huge_pte(tlb->mm);
 			page = pmd_page(*pmd);
 			pmd_clear(pmd);
+			tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmd, addr);
 			page_remove_rmap(page);
 			VM_BUG_ON(page_mapcount(page) < 0);
 			add_mm_counter(tlb->mm, MM_ANONPAGES, -HPAGE_PMD_NR);
Index: linux/mm/memory.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/mm/memory.c	2011-11-11 14:26:33.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/mm/memory.c	2011-11-11 14:26:35.000000000 +0800
@@ -1231,7 +1231,7 @@ static inline unsigned long zap_pmd_rang
 			if (next-addr != HPAGE_PMD_SIZE) {
 				VM_BUG_ON(!rwsem_is_locked(&tlb->mm->mmap_sem));
 				split_huge_page_pmd(vma->vm_mm, pmd);
-			} else if (zap_huge_pmd(tlb, vma, pmd))
+			} else if (zap_huge_pmd(tlb, vma, pmd, addr))
 				continue;
 			/* fall through */
 		}

Re: [patch 3/5]thp: add tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry

[Andrea Arcangeli]

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 02:36:29PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 23:36 +0800, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:59:31AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > > Index: linux/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux.orig/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:00:39.000000000 +0800
> > > +++ linux/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:02:52.000000000 +0800
> > > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> > >  #define tlb_start_vma(tlb, vma) do { } while (0)
> > >  #define tlb_end_vma(tlb, vma) do { } while (0)
> > >  #define __tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, ptep, address) do { } while (0)
> > > +#define __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address) do { } while (0)
> > >  #define tlb_flush(tlb) flush_tlb_mm((tlb)->mm)
> > 
> > This is superfluous, it's already define below as noop.
> > 
> > >  
> > >  #include <asm-generic/tlb.h>
> > > Index: linux/include/asm-generic/tlb.h
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux.orig/include/asm-generic/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:00:23.000000000 +0800
> > > +++ linux/include/asm-generic/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:18:01.000000000 +0800
> > > @@ -139,6 +139,16 @@ static inline void tlb_remove_page(struc
> > >  		__tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, ptep, address);	\
> > >  	} while (0)
> > >  
> > > +#ifndef __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry
> > > +#define __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address) do {} while(0)
> > > +#endif
> > > +
> > > +#define tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address)		\
> > > +	do {							\
> > > +		tlb->need_flush = 1;				\
> > > +		__tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address);	\
> > > +	} while (0)
> > 
> > this looks weird, why do we set need_flush = 1 again, considering that
> > we're doing tlb_remove_page() just a few lines later (which also sets
> > tlb->need_flush = 1).
> > 
> > Ok that other archs may need the __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry to be
> > called (and I've no idea why), but the need_flush = 1 seems
> > unnecessary.
> > 
> > Why other archs need the __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry to be called?
> > 
> > One way to go would be to change the tlb->need_flush = 1 in
> > __tlb_remove_page to a VM_BUG_ON(!tlb->need_flush) and then we keep it
> > above and we add the __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry call.
> > 
> > Or is there any place where __tlb_remove_page is called without a
> > tlb_remove_*tlb_entry being called before it?
> > 
> > In any case the VM_BUG_ON will verify this.
> ok, I made the whole tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry() noop now. we don't need
> add anything on it for x86 currently. We can change it later if
> necessary.

I thought it'd be cleaner to have only the __tlb_remove_*tlb_entry
variants set need_flush=1 and have __tlb_remove_page just check that
is set under a VM_BUG_ON. That would also avoid a second unnecessary
need_flush = 1 for the pte case which is repeated now (it's not the
repeated in the pmd case in your patch because it's a noop, but the
pte case it's not a noop). Maybe it's not possible but if it's
possible it looks better.

Re: [patch 3/5]thp: add tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry

[Shaohua Li]

On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 14:53 +0800, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 02:36:29PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 23:36 +0800, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:59:31AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > > > Index: linux/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h
> > > > ===================================================================
> > > > --- linux.orig/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:00:39.000000000 +0800
> > > > +++ linux/arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:02:52.000000000 +0800
> > > > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> > > >  #define tlb_start_vma(tlb, vma) do { } while (0)
> > > >  #define tlb_end_vma(tlb, vma) do { } while (0)
> > > >  #define __tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, ptep, address) do { } while (0)
> > > > +#define __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address) do { } while (0)
> > > >  #define tlb_flush(tlb) flush_tlb_mm((tlb)->mm)
> > > 
> > > This is superfluous, it's already define below as noop.
> > > 
> > > >  
> > > >  #include <asm-generic/tlb.h>
> > > > Index: linux/include/asm-generic/tlb.h
> > > > ===================================================================
> > > > --- linux.orig/include/asm-generic/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:00:23.000000000 +0800
> > > > +++ linux/include/asm-generic/tlb.h	2011-10-25 09:18:01.000000000 +0800
> > > > @@ -139,6 +139,16 @@ static inline void tlb_remove_page(struc
> > > >  		__tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, ptep, address);	\
> > > >  	} while (0)
> > > >  
> > > > +#ifndef __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry
> > > > +#define __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address) do {} while(0)
> > > > +#endif
> > > > +
> > > > +#define tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address)		\
> > > > +	do {							\
> > > > +		tlb->need_flush = 1;				\
> > > > +		__tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry(tlb, pmdp, address);	\
> > > > +	} while (0)
> > > 
> > > this looks weird, why do we set need_flush = 1 again, considering that
> > > we're doing tlb_remove_page() just a few lines later (which also sets
> > > tlb->need_flush = 1).
> > > 
> > > Ok that other archs may need the __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry to be
> > > called (and I've no idea why), but the need_flush = 1 seems
> > > unnecessary.
> > > 
> > > Why other archs need the __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry to be called?
> > > 
> > > One way to go would be to change the tlb->need_flush = 1 in
> > > __tlb_remove_page to a VM_BUG_ON(!tlb->need_flush) and then we keep it
> > > above and we add the __tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry call.
> > > 
> > > Or is there any place where __tlb_remove_page is called without a
> > > tlb_remove_*tlb_entry being called before it?
> > > 
> > > In any case the VM_BUG_ON will verify this.
> > ok, I made the whole tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry() noop now. we don't need
> > add anything on it for x86 currently. We can change it later if
> > necessary.
> 
> I thought it'd be cleaner to have only the __tlb_remove_*tlb_entry
> variants set need_flush=1 and have __tlb_remove_page just check that
> is set under a VM_BUG_ON. That would also avoid a second unnecessary
> need_flush = 1 for the pte case which is repeated now (it's not the
> repeated in the pmd case in your patch because it's a noop, but the
> pte case it's not a noop). Maybe it's not possible but if it's
> possible it looks better.
makes sense to me. __tlb_remove_page should always follow after
__tlb_remove_*tlb_entry. if we set need_flush=1 in
__tlb_remove_*tlb_entry, tlb_remove_*tlb_entry == __tlb_remove_*tlb
entry then, we can delete __xxx. But this sounds not related to the
issue, I'd prefer another patch to clean it up. how do you think?