Re: [PATCH 7.2 v10 0/2] skip redundant sync IPIs when TLB flush sent them

[Pasha Tatashin]

On 04-24 06:30, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2026 14:25:26 +0800 Lance Yang <lance.yang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > When page table operations require synchronization with software/lockless
> > walkers, they call tlb_remove_table_sync_{one,rcu}() after flushing the
> > TLB (tlb->freed_tables or tlb->unshared_tables).
> > 
> > On architectures where the TLB flush already sends IPIs to all target CPUs,
> > the subsequent sync IPI broadcast is redundant. This is not only costly on
> > large systems where it disrupts all CPUs even for single-process page table
> > operations, but has also been reported to hurt RT workloads[1].
> > 
> > This series introduces tlb_table_flush_implies_ipi_broadcast() to check if
> > the prior TLB flush already provided the necessary synchronization. When
> > true, the sync calls can early-return.
> > 
> > A few cases rely on this synchronization:
> > 
> > 1) hugetlb PMD unshare[2]: The problem is not the freeing but the reuse
> >    of the PMD table for other purposes in the last remaining user after
> >    unsharing.
> > 
> > 2) khugepaged collapse[3]: Ensure no concurrent GUP-fast before collapsing
> >    and (possibly) freeing the page table / re-depositing it.
> 
> Sashiko questions:
> 	https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260424062528.71951-1-lance.yang@xxxxxxxxx
> 
> (I never know if my Sashiko emails are welcome/useful.  Maybe Sashiko
> said the same stuff about v9 and it's all wrong.  But better safe than
> sorry!)

These emails are helpful; but, I do not believe you should have to 
manually follow up with a link to every new patch series.

Perhaps  Sashiko could automatically send a summary email in response to 
the cover letter, or provide a link once the reviews are complete. For 
the kexec ML, we opted-in with Roman to receive automated emails from 
sashiko.

+Cc: Roman.

> 
>