Re: [RFC PATCH 5/6] x86/alternatives: use temporary mm for text poking

[Dave Hansen]

On 08/29/2018 09:32 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> It's plausible that there are workloads where the current code is
> faster, such as where we're munmapping a single page via syscall and
> we'd prefer to only flush that one TLB entry even if the flush
> operation is slower as a result.

Yeah, I don't specifically remember testing it.  But, I know I wanted to
avoid throwing away thousands of TLB entries when we only want to rid
ourselves of one.