On 04/28/2015 06:15 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 01:42:10PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> At some point, I'd like to implement PCID on x86 (if no one beats me >> to it, and this is a low priority for me), which will allow us to skip >> expensive TLB flushes while context switching. I have no idea whether >> ARM can do something similar. > > I talked with Dave about implementing PCID and he thinks that it will be > net loss. TLB entries will live longer and it means we would need to trigger > more IPIs to flash them out when we have to. Cost of IPIs will be higher > than benifit from hot TLB after context switch. I suspect that may depend on how you do the shootdown. If, when receiving a TLB shootdown for a non-current PCID, we just flush all the entries for that PCID and remove the CPU from the mm's cpu_vm_mask_var, we will never receive more than one shootdown IPI for a non-current mm, but we will still get the benefits of TLB longevity when dealing with eg. pipe workloads where tasks take turns running on the same CPU. -- All rights reversed -- 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>