From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 01:46:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 01:46:15 -0500 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:45316 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 01:46:08 -0500 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 22:28:07 -0800 Message-Id: <200101040628.WAA01899@pizda.ninka.net> From: "David S. Miller" To: weigand@immd1.informatik.uni-erlangen.de CC: torvalds@transmeta.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, ton@de.ibm.com In-Reply-To: <200101012215.XAA20190@faui11.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> (message from Ulrich Weigand on Mon, 1 Jan 2001 23:15:26 +0100 (MET)) Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] TLB flush changes for S/390 In-Reply-To: <200101012215.XAA20190@faui11.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Ulrich Weigand Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 23:15:26 +0100 (MET) * Is there some reason why ptep_test_and_clear_young should *not*, after all, flush the TLB? Yes, because the accuracy of that state bit is not required to be %100 perfect. Less SMP tlb flushing traffic from vmscan runs is desirable, thus no flush. Later, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/