On 08/29/2018 09:32 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > It's plausible that there are workloads where the current code is > faster, such as where we're munmapping a single page via syscall and > we'd prefer to only flush that one TLB entry even if the flush > operation is slower as a result. Yeah, I don't specifically remember testing it. But, I know I wanted to avoid throwing away thousands of TLB entries when we only want to rid ourselves of one.
