Re: [RFC 04/10] x86/mm: Pass flush_tlb_info to flush_tlb_others() etc

[Nadav Amit]

> On May 7, 2017, at 5:38 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> @@ -243,15 +237,15 @@ static void flush_tlb_func(void *info)
> 		return;
> 	}
> 
> -	if (f->flush_end == TLB_FLUSH_ALL) {
> +	if (f->end == TLB_FLUSH_ALL) {
> 		local_flush_tlb();
> 		trace_tlb_flush(TLB_REMOTE_SHOOTDOWN, TLB_FLUSH_ALL);
> 	} else {
> 		unsigned long addr;
> 		unsigned long nr_pages =
> -			(f->flush_end - f->flush_start) / PAGE_SIZE;
> -		addr = f->flush_start;
> -		while (addr < f->flush_end) {
> +			(f->end - f->start) / PAGE_SIZE;
> +		addr = f->start;
> +		while (addr < f->end) {
> 			__flush_tlb_single(addr);
> 			addr += PAGE_SIZE;
> 		}
> @@ -260,33 +254,27 @@ static void flush_tlb_func(void *info)
> }
> 
> void native_flush_tlb_others(const struct cpumask *cpumask,
> -				 struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long start,
> -				 unsigned long end)
> +			     const struct flush_tlb_info *info)
> {
> -	struct flush_tlb_info info;
> -
> -	info.flush_mm = mm;
> -	info.flush_start = start;
> -	info.flush_end = end;
> -
> 	count_vm_tlb_event(NR_TLB_REMOTE_FLUSH);
> -	if (end == TLB_FLUSH_ALL)
> +	if (info->end == TLB_FLUSH_ALL)
> 		trace_tlb_flush(TLB_REMOTE_SEND_IPI, TLB_FLUSH_ALL);
> 	else
> 		trace_tlb_flush(TLB_REMOTE_SEND_IPI,
> -				(end - start) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> +				(info->end - info->start) >> PAGE_SHIFT);

I know it is stupid, but since you already change the code, can you make
flush_tlb_func() and native_flush_tlb_others() consistent in the way
they compute the number of pages? (either â>> PAGE_SHIFTâ or â/ PAGE_SIZEâ)?

On a different topic: I do not like or actually understand why TLBSTATE_OK
is defined as 1 and not 0. The very least it would generate a better code.

Thanks,
Nadav