On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> However, clearing the accessed bit does not lead to any
> consistency issues, there is no reason to flush the TLB
> immediately. The TLB flush can be deferred until some
> later point in time.
Ugh. I absolutely detest this patch.
If we're going to leave the TLB dirty, then dammit, leave it dirty.
Don't play some half-way games.
Here's the patch you should just try:
int ptep_clear_flush_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
unsigned long address, pte_t *ptep)
{
return ptep_test_and_clear_young(vma, address, ptep);
}
instead of complicating things.
Rationale: if the working set is so big that we start paging things
out, we sure as hell don't need to worry about TLB flushing. It will
flush itself.
And conversely - if it doesn't flush itself, and something stays
marked as "accessed" in the TLB for a long time even though we've
cleared it in the page tables, we don't care, because clearly there
isn't enough memory pressure for the accessed bit to matter.
Linus
--
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>