linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Flush huge TLB

To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Flush huge TLB
From: Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 22:55:05 +0800
Cc: David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>, "Jayachandran C." <jayachandranc@netlogicmicro.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4Kw54x16eybZ2/ThkzxWavMkZy7417sAB+2oD2doZpA=; b=igjPA6XqjRDH5DOrMW+YJVjNnkVuOWhzW3N5q626pGUPcKo9RF5xGg/pnoyBorO3Jn HToczO/hCPXh3+9pv7eDKmUbzNpOu7Jo5MPF9W1mYG1bbQTI8bdAAdtEJBIl8Bu3E9O2 mWp64XS8WhBZbjGgBaO5uTGCW1xL4Y0u/kVZE=
In-reply-to: <20111118144600.GA12409@linux-mips.org>
References: <CAJd=RBBTx8zWrFfVQGMK=aj=iPO_+i6nvqkhGDfYp_9=d1hyEw@mail.gmail.com> <20111118144600.GA12409@linux-mips.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:46 PM, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 09:15:39PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
>
>> When flushing TLB, if @vma is backed by huge page, we could flush huge TLB,
>> due to that huge page is defined to be far from normal page.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>
>
> It seems this patch is identical to
> https://patchwork.linux-mips.org/patch/2825/ which I've already applied?
>

Maybe you forget the following message:)

btw, I want to change
+                       size = (end - start) >> HPAGE_SHIFT;
to
+                       size = (end - start) / HPAGE_SIZE;

if it is not too late.

Best regards
Hillf

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 09:09:37PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
>
>> Subject: Flush huge TLB
>> From: Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>
>>
>> When flushing TLB, if @vma is backed by huge page, we could flush huge TLB,
>> due to that huge page is defined to be far from normal page.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>
>> Acked-by: David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>
>
> I assume this 2nd version was actually meant to be applied, not just for RFC
> so I've queued it for 3.3.  But you better remove that RFC from subject and
> start a fresh mail thread when posting a patch to avoid confusion!
>
> Thanks,
>
>  Ralf
>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>