Re: [RFC, PATCH] TLB flush changes for S/390

From: David S. Miller (davem@redhat.com)
Date: Thu Jan 04 2001 - 01:28:07 EST

Next message: Gerhard Mack: "Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segments, breaking bug exploits"
Previous message: Tim Sailer: "Network Performance?"
In reply to: Ulrich Weigand: "[RFC, PATCH] TLB flush changes for S/390"
Next in thread: Ulrich Weigand: "Re: [RFC, PATCH] TLB flush changes for S/390"
Reply: Ulrich Weigand: "Re: [RFC, PATCH] TLB flush changes for S/390"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

From: Ulrich Weigand <weigand@immd1.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 23:15:26 +0100 (MET)

* Is there some reason why ptep_test_and_clear_young should
*not*, after all, flush the TLB?

Yes, because the accuracy of that state bit is not required to
be %100 perfect. Less SMP tlb flushing traffic from vmscan
runs is desirable, thus no flush.

Later,
David S. Miller
davem@redhat.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Gerhard Mack: "Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segments, breaking bug exploits"
Previous message: Tim Sailer: "Network Performance?"
In reply to: Ulrich Weigand: "[RFC, PATCH] TLB flush changes for S/390"
Next in thread: Ulrich Weigand: "Re: [RFC, PATCH] TLB flush changes for S/390"
Reply: Ulrich Weigand: "Re: [RFC, PATCH] TLB flush changes for S/390"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 07 2001 - 21:00:17 EST