linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@hpe.com>,
	Mike Travis <mike.travis@hpe.com>, Russ Anderson <rja@hpe.com>,
	Hedi Berriche <hedi.berriche@hpe.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 8/9] x86/mm/tlb: Remove UV special case
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 21:50:27 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1907092146570.1758@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190702235151.4377-9-namit@vmware.com>

On Tue, 2 Jul 2019, Nadav Amit wrote:

> SGI UV support is outdated and not maintained, and it is not clear how
> it performs relatively to non-UV. Remove the code to simplify the code.

You should at least Cc the SGI/HP folks on that. They are still
around. Done so.

> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
> Suggested-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/mm/tlb.c | 25 -------------------------
>  1 file changed, 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> index b47a71820f35..64afe1215495 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> @@ -689,31 +689,6 @@ void native_flush_tlb_multi(const struct cpumask *cpumask,
>  		trace_tlb_flush(TLB_REMOTE_SEND_IPI,
>  				(info->end - info->start) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
>  
> -	if (is_uv_system()) {
> -		/*
> -		 * This whole special case is confused.  UV has a "Broadcast
> -		 * Assist Unit", which seems to be a fancy way to send IPIs.
> -		 * Back when x86 used an explicit TLB flush IPI, UV was
> -		 * optimized to use its own mechanism.  These days, x86 uses
> -		 * smp_call_function_many(), but UV still uses a manual IPI,
> -		 * and that IPI's action is out of date -- it does a manual
> -		 * flush instead of calling flush_tlb_func_remote().  This
> -		 * means that the percpu tlb_gen variables won't be updated
> -		 * and we'll do pointless flushes on future context switches.
> -		 *
> -		 * Rather than hooking native_flush_tlb_multi() here, I think
> -		 * that UV should be updated so that smp_call_function_many(),
> -		 * etc, are optimal on UV.
> -		 */
> -		flush_tlb_func_local(info);
> -
> -		cpumask = uv_flush_tlb_others(cpumask, info);
> -		if (cpumask)
> -			smp_call_function_many(cpumask, flush_tlb_func_remote,
> -					       (void *)info, 1);
> -		return;
> -	}
> -
>  	/*
>  	 * If no page tables were freed, we can skip sending IPIs to
>  	 * CPUs in lazy TLB mode. They will flush the CPU themselves
> -- 
> 2.17.1
> 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2019-07-09 19:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-02 23:51 [PATCH v2 0/9] x86: Concurrent TLB flushes Nadav Amit
2019-07-02 23:51 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] smp: Run functions concurrently in smp_call_function_many() Nadav Amit
2019-07-02 23:51 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] x86/mm/tlb: Remove reason as argument for flush_tlb_func_local() Nadav Amit
2019-07-02 23:51 ` [PATCH v2 3/9] x86/mm/tlb: Open-code on_each_cpu_cond_mask() for tlb_is_not_lazy() Nadav Amit
2019-07-02 23:51 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] x86/mm/tlb: Flush remote and local TLBs concurrently Nadav Amit
2019-07-03 14:04   ` Juergen Gross
2019-07-03 17:02     ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-03 17:43       ` [Xen-devel] " Andrew Cooper
2019-07-03 18:09         ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-02 23:51 ` [PATCH v2 5/9] x86/mm/tlb: Privatize cpu_tlbstate Nadav Amit
2019-07-02 23:51 ` [PATCH v2 6/9] x86/mm/tlb: Do not make is_lazy dirty for no reason Nadav Amit
2019-07-02 23:51 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] cpumask: Mark functions as pure Nadav Amit
2019-07-02 23:51 ` [PATCH v2 8/9] x86/mm/tlb: Remove UV special case Nadav Amit
2019-07-09 19:50   ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2019-07-09 20:09     ` Russ Anderson
2019-07-09 20:29       ` Mike Travis
2019-07-09 21:09         ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-09 21:17           ` Mike Travis
2019-07-02 23:51 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] x86/mm/tlb: Remove unnecessary uses of the inline keyword Nadav Amit

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.DEB.2.21.1907092146570.1758@nanos.tec.linutronix.de \
    --to=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=hedi.berriche@hpe.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mike.travis@hpe.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=namit@vmware.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rja@hpe.com \
    --cc=sivanich@hpe.com \
    --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).