* Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [...] > > Rik, mind sending an updated patch that addresses Linus's > concerns, or should I code it up if you are busy? > > We can also certainly try the second patch, but I'd do it at > the end of the series, to put some tree distance between the > two patches, to not concentrate regression risks too tightly > in the Git space, to help out with hard to bisect problems... I'd also like to have the second patch separately because I'd like to measure spurious fault frequency before and after the change, with a reference workload. Just a single page fault, even it's a minor one, might make a micro-optimization a net loss. INVLPG might be the cheaper option on average - it needs to be measured. (I'll do that, just please keep it separate from the main TLB-flush optimization.) Thanks, Ingo -- 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>