Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 11/11] mm,sched: conditionally skip lazy TLB mm refcounting | From | Rik van Riel <> | Date | Fri, 03 Aug 2018 13:39:52 -0400 |
| |
On Fri, 2018-08-03 at 19:25 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 12:40:48PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > > On Fri, 2018-08-03 at 17:56 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > Why can't we skip the ->active_mm swizzle and keep ->active_mm == > > > ->mm. > > > > > > Doing the swizzle but not the refcount just makes me itch. > > > > I am working on that now, it adds another 7-8 > > patches on top of this series. > > I thought those were taking ->active_mm out entirely, not avoiding > the > swizzle, but I might have missed something in the middle :-)
At this point, only the fact that ->active_mm is still being used by a few places in the code :)
> > The big question is, do we want this optimization > > to wait for further cleanups, or should we run with > > code that seems to be stable right now, and put > > additional cleanups and enhancements on top of it > > later? > > At the very least the Changelog needs to explain why we cannot do > away > with the swizzle now and how doing the swizzle without the > refcounting > is not completely broken (I think I see, but urgh).
The changelog for patches 9 & 10 explains, I think.
What is missing from my explanation?
How would you like to see it explained?
-- All Rights Reversed.[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |