On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 10:14:07AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2010-04-09 at 14:07 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 09:17:44PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Fix up powerpc to the new mmu_gather stuffs. > > > > > > PPC has an extra batching queue to RCU free the actual pagetable > > > allocations, use the ARCH extentions for that for now. > > > > > > For the ppc64_tlb_batch, which tracks the vaddrs to unhash from the > > > hardware hash-table, keep using per-cpu arrays but flush on context > > > switch and use a TIF bit to track the laxy_mmu state. > > > > Hm. Pity powerpc can't just use tlb flush gathering for this batching, > > (which is what it was designed for). Then it could avoid these tricks. > > What's preventing this? Adding a tlb gather for COW case in > > copy_page_range? > > I'm not quite sure what about that, didn't fully investigate it, just > wanted to get something working for now. No it's not your problem, but just perhaps a good add-on to your patchset. Thanks for thinking about it, though. > > Of of the things is that both power and sparc need more than the struct > page we normally gather. > > I did think of making the mmu_gather have something like > > struct mmu_page { > struct page *page; > #ifdef HAVE_ARCH_TLB_VADDR > unsigned long vaddr; > #endif > }; Well you could also have a per-arch struct for this, which they can fill in their own info with (I think powerpc takes the pte as well) > > struct mmu_gather { > ... > unsigned int nr; > struct mmu_page *pages; > }; > > > and doing that vaddr collection right along with it in the same batch. > > I think that that would work, Ben, Dave? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html