Re: [PATCH 06/12] x86/mm: use INVLPGB for kernel TLB flushes

[Rik van Riel]

On Fri, 2025-01-10 at 08:29 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >  about.
> 
> IIRC, the "big" invalidation modes are pretty cheap to execute. Most
> of
> the cost comes from the TLB refill, not the flush itself.
> 
> But there's no substitute for actually measuring it. There's some
> wonky
> stuff out there. The last time Andy L. went and looked at it, there
> were
> oddities like INVPCID's "Individual-address invalidation" and INVLPG
> having surprisingly different performance.
> 
Agreed on all points.

If you guys don't mind, I'm going to keep this on the
back burner, while I work my way through all the
suggested code cleanups and improvements first.


-- 
All Rights Reversed.