Re: [PATCH 2/6] vmtrunc: restore unmap_vmas zap_bytes

[Ingo Molnar]

* Hugh Dickins <hugh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> The low-latency unmap_vmas patch silently moved the zap_bytes test
> after the TLB finish and lockbreak and regather: why?  That not only
> makes zap_bytes redundant (might as well use ZAP_BLOCK_SIZE), it makes
> the unmap_vmas level redundant too - it's all about saving TLB flushes
> when unmapping a series of small vmas.

the problem was latency generated by pages queueing up in tlb_gather's 
queue and being freed in one loop, causing latencies. So there was no 
latency-break, only a shifting of the queue.

> Move zap_bytes test back before the lockbreak, and delete the curious
> comment that a small zap block size doesn't matter: it's true
> need_flush prevents TLB flush when no page has been unmapped, but
> unmapping pages in small blocks involves many more TLB flushes than in
> large blocks.

could we perhaps free those pages outside of the lock? That would be
just as good for me.

	Ingo
-
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/