lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Sep]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 1/2] mm: use update_mmu_tlb() on the second thread
    From
    On 29.09.22 13:23, Qi Zheng wrote:
    > As message in commit 7df676974359 ("mm/memory.c: Update local TLB
    > if PTE entry exists") said, we should update local TLB only on the
    > second thread. So in the do_anonymous_page() here, we should use
    > update_mmu_tlb() instead of update_mmu_cache() on the second thread.
    >

    Maybe mention here "This only affects performance, but not correctness."

    Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>

    > Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
    > Reviewed-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
    > ---
    > mm/memory.c | 2 +-
    > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
    >
    > diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
    > index 118e5f023597..9e11c783ba0e 100644
    > --- a/mm/memory.c
    > +++ b/mm/memory.c
    > @@ -4122,7 +4122,7 @@ static vm_fault_t do_anonymous_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
    > vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address,
    > &vmf->ptl);
    > if (!pte_none(*vmf->pte)) {
    > - update_mmu_cache(vma, vmf->address, vmf->pte);
    > + update_mmu_tlb(vma, vmf->address, vmf->pte);
    > goto release;
    > }
    >

    --
    Thanks,

    David / dhildenb

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2022-09-30 10:31    [W:7.137 / U:0.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site