Re: page fault scalability patch V12 [0/7]: Overview andperformance tests

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 15:54 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Nick Piggin wrote:
> 
> > Yep, the update_mmu_cache issue is real. There is a parallel problem
> > that is update_mmu_cache can be called on a pte who's page has since
> > been evicted and reused. Again, that looks safe on IA64, but maybe
> > not on other architectures.
> > 
> > It can be solved by moving lru_cache_add to after update_mmu_cache in
> > all cases but the "update accessed bit" type fault. I solved that by
> > simply defining that out for architectures that don't need it - a raced
> > fault will simply get repeated if need be.
> > 
> 
> The page-freed-before-update_mmu_cache issue can be solved in that way,
> not the set_pte and update_mmu_cache not performed under the same ptl
> section issue that you raised.

What is the problem with update_mmu_cache ? It doesn't need to be done
in the same lock section since it's approx. equivalent to a HW fault,
which doesn't take the ptl...

Ben.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/