Re: [PATCH v2] x86,mm: only trim the mm_cpumask once a second

[Dave Hansen]

On 12/3/24 11:48, Rik van Riel wrote:
> Sending TLB flush IPIs to CPUs that are in the mm_cpumask, but no
> longer running the program causes a regression in the will-it-scale
> tlbflush2 test. This test is contrived, but a large regression here
> might cause a small regression in some real world workload.

The patch seems OK in theory, but this explanation doesn't sit right
with me.

Most of the will-it-scale tests including tlbflush2 have long-lived
CPU-bound threads. They shouldn't schedule out much at all during the
benchmark. I don't see how they could drive a significant increase in
IPIs to cause a 10%+ regression.

I'd much prefer that we understand the regression in detail before
throwing more code at fixing it.