Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754873AbYKRR2X (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:28:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752870AbYKRR2P (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:28:15 -0500 Received: from vpn.id2.novell.com ([195.33.99.129]:29362 "EHLO vpn.id2.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752841AbYKRR2O convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:28:14 -0500 Message-Id: <4923096A.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 8.0.0 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 17:28:58 +0000 From: "Jan Beulich" To: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Zachary Amsden" Subject: Re: arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode() in arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c References: <4921428A.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <1226944387.9969.77.camel@bodhitayantram.eng.vmware.com> <4921BA8E.60806@goop.org> <492284CE.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <4922F4EC.6050408@goop.org> In-Reply-To: <4922F4EC.6050408@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1580 Lines: 33 >>> Jeremy Fitzhardinge 18.11.08 18:01 >>> >Yes, it disables interrupts while its actually issuing the multicall. I >don't think that matters much, since the multicall itself can't be >preempted (can it?) and the rest of the code is very short. Originally >it disabled interrupts for the entire lazy section, which is obviously >worse. If an interrupt (event) comes in, a multicall could of course be 'preempted', in order to service the event. But of course that works only if event delivery isn't disabled. >> There's no reason to do any flush at all if you suppress batching temporarily. >> And it only needs (would need) explicit suppressing here because you can't >> easily recognize being in the context of a page fault handler from the >> batching functions (other than recognizing being in the context of an >> interrupt handler, which is what would allow removing the flush calls from >> highmem_32.c). > >I'm not sure what your concern is here. If batching is currently >enabled, then the flush will push out anything pending immediately. If >batching is disabled, then the flush will be a noop and return immediately. Latency, as before. The page fault should have to take longer than it really needs, and the flushing of a pending batch clearly doesn't belong to the page fault itself. Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/