Cc: Robin Holt <holt@...>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...>, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...>, Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Christoph Lameter <clameter@...>, Jack Steiner <steiner@...>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...>, <kvm-devel@...>, Kanoj Sarcar <kanojsarcar@...>, Roland Dreier <rdreier@...>, Steve Wise <swise@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, Avi Kivity <avi@...>, <linux-mm@...>, <general@...>, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...>, Rusty Russell <rusty@...>, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@...>, Chris Wright <chrisw@...>, Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@...>, Eric Dumazet <dada1@...>, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...>
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 08:18:21AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
We are in the process of attempting this now. Unfortunately for SGI,
Christoph is on vacation right now so we have been trying to work it
internally.
We are looking through two possible methods, one we add a callout to the
tlb flush paths for both the mmu_gather and flush_tlb_page locations.
The other we place a specific callout seperate from the gather callouts
in the paths we are concerned with. We will look at both more carefully
before posting.
In either implementation, not all call paths would require the stall
to ensure data integrity. Would it be acceptable to always put a
sleepable stall in even if the code path did not require the pages be
unwritable prior to continuing? If we did that, I would be freed from
having a pool of invalidate threads ready for XPMEM to use for that work.
Maybe there is a better way, but the sleeping requirement we would have
on the threads make most options seem unworkable.
Thanks,
Robin
--
