On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 10:15:15AM -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 09:08:21AM -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 11:07 PM, Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c > >> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c > >> > @@ -455,6 +455,39 @@ void arch_tlbbatch_flush(struct arch_tlbflush_unmap_batch *batch) > >> > put_cpu(); > >> > } > >> > > >> > +/* > >> > + * Ensure that any arch_tlbbatch_add_mm calls on this mm are up to date when > >> > >> s/are up to date/have flushed the TLBs/ perhaps? > >> > >> > >> Can you update this comment in arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h: > >> > >> * - Fully flush a single mm. .mm will be set, .end will be > >> * TLB_FLUSH_ALL, and .new_tlb_gen will be the tlb_gen to > >> * which the IPI sender is trying to catch us up. > >> > >> by adding something like: This can also happen due to > >> arch_tlbflush_flush_one_mm(), in which case it's quite likely that > >> most or all CPUs are already up to date. > >> > > > > No problem, thanks. Care to ack the patch below? If so, I'll send it > > to Ingo with x86 and linux-mm cc'd after some tests complete (hopefully > > successfully). It's fairly x86 specific and makes sense to go in with the > > rest of the pcid and mm tlb_gen stuff rather than via Andrew's tree even > > through it touches core mm. > > Acked-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx> # for the x86 parts > > When you send to Ingo, you might want to change > arch_tlbbatch_flush_one_mm to arch_tlbbatch_flush_one_mm(), because > otherwise he'll probably do it for you :) *cringe*. I fixed it up. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
