From: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Mike Travis <mike.travis@hpe.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3 8/9] x86/mm/tlb: Remove UV special case
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 17:58:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190719005837.4150-9-namit@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190719005837.4150-1-namit@vmware.com>
SGI UV support is outdated and not maintained, and it is not clear how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.
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Acked-by: Mike Travis <mike.travis@hpe.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 89f83ad19507..40daad52ec7d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
@@ -684,31 +684,6 @@ 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- * and that IPI's action is out of date -- it does a manual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((void *)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
--
2.20.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-19 0:59 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
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 ` Nadav Amit [this message]
2019-07-19 2:25 ` [PATCH v3 8/9] x86/mm/tlb: Remove UV special case 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=20190719005837.4150-9-namit@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=mike.travis@hpe.com \
--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).