Re: Page fault scalability patch V18: Drop first acquisition of ptl

From: David S. Miller <davem_at_davemloft.net>
Date: 2005-03-04 04:43:37
On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 17:30:28 +1100
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 04:19 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> 
> > You don't want to do that for all architectures, as I said earlier.
> > eg. i386 can concurrently set the dirty bit with the MMU (which won't
> > honour the lock).
> > 
> > So you then need an atomic lock, atomic pte operations, and atomic
> > unlock where previously you had only the atomic pte operation. This is
> > disastrous for performance.
> 
> Of course, but I was answering to David about sparc64 which uses
> software TLB load :)

Right.

The current situation on sparc64 is that the tlb miss handler is
~10 cycles.

Like I said, I can use this thing if it just increases access, without
modifying the TLB miss handler at all.

Hmmm... let me think about this some more.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Thu Mar 3 13:45:57 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:36 EST