linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/9] x86/mm/tlb: Privatize cpu_tlbstate
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 18:54:00 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <92B64D24-04DD-45A6-86A4-758CD73E0909@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5c4b7bd2-ea0e-dc8d-edbb-1b1b739b963e@intel.com>

> On Jul 19, 2019, at 11:48 AM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> On 7/19/19 11:43 AM, Nadav Amit wrote:
>> Andy said that for the lazy tlb optimizations there might soon be more
>> shared state. If you prefer, I can move is_lazy outside of tlb_state, and
>> not set it in any alternative struct.
> 
> I just wanted to make sure that we capture these rules:
> 
> 1. If the data is only ever accessed on the "owning" CPU via
>   this_cpu_*(), put it in 'tlb_state'.
> 2. If the data is read by other CPUs, put it in 'tlb_state_shared'.
> 
> I actually like the idea of having two structs.

Yes, that’s exactly the idea. In the (1) case, we may even be able to mark
the struct with __thread qualifier, which IIRC would prevent memory barriers
from causing these values being reread.

  reply	other threads:[~2019-07-19 18:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-19  0:58 [PATCH v3 0/9] x86: Concurrent TLB flushes Nadav Amit
2019-07-19  0:58 ` [PATCH v3 1/9] smp: Run functions concurrently in smp_call_function_many() Nadav Amit
2019-07-19 18:23   ` Dave Hansen
2019-07-22 18:16     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-22 18:41       ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-22 19:34         ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-22 18:21   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-22 18:34     ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-22 19:19       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-22 18:37     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-07-22 18:40       ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-22 18:51         ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-07-22 19:02           ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-25 12:36             ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-07-25 19:10               ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-19  0:58 ` [PATCH v3 2/9] x86/mm/tlb: Remove reason as argument for flush_tlb_func_local() Nadav Amit
2019-07-19  0:58 ` [PATCH v3 3/9] x86/mm/tlb: Open-code on_each_cpu_cond_mask() for tlb_is_not_lazy() Nadav Amit
2019-07-19 18:36   ` Dave Hansen
2019-07-19 18:41     ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-19 22:44       ` Joe Perches
2019-07-19 23:02         ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-22 18:27   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-22 19:47   ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-07-22 19:51     ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-19  0:58 ` [PATCH v3 4/9] x86/mm/tlb: Flush remote and local TLBs concurrently Nadav Amit
2019-07-22 19:14   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-22 19:27     ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-22 19:32       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-26  7:28   ` Juergen Gross
2019-07-31  0:13   ` Michael Kelley
2019-07-19  0:58 ` [PATCH v3 5/9] x86/mm/tlb: Privatize cpu_tlbstate Nadav Amit
2019-07-19 18:38   ` Dave Hansen
2019-07-19 18:43     ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-19 18:48       ` Dave Hansen
2019-07-19 18:54         ` Nadav Amit [this message]
2019-07-20 13:58           ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-07-21 20:21     ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-19  0:58 ` [PATCH v3 6/9] x86/mm/tlb: Do not make is_lazy dirty for no reason Nadav Amit
2019-07-19  0:58 ` [PATCH v3 7/9] cpumask: Mark functions as pure Nadav Amit
2019-07-19  0:58 ` [PATCH v3 8/9] x86/mm/tlb: Remove UV special case Nadav Amit
2019-07-19  2:25   ` Mike Travis
2019-07-19  4:58     ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-31  3:11     ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-19  0:58 ` [PATCH v3 9/9] x86/mm/tlb: Remove unnecessary uses of the inline keyword Nadav Amit
2019-07-19 21:36 ` [PATCH v3 0/9] x86: Concurrent TLB flushes Dave Hansen

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=92B64D24-04DD-45A6-86A4-758CD73E0909@vmware.com \
    --to=namit@vmware.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).