mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Venki Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Voluntary leave_mm before entering ACPI C3
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:40:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071219194032.GA8849@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <476972A0.3050105@zytor.com>


* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> * Venki Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Aviod TLB flush IPIs during C3 states by voluntary leave_mm() before 
>>> entering C3.
>>>
>>> The performance impact of TLB flush on C3 should not be significant with 
>>> respect to C3 wakeup latency. Also, CPUs tend to flush TLB in hardware 
>>> while in C3 anyways.
>>>
>
> Are there any CPUs around which *don't* flush the TLB across C3?  (I 
> guess it's not guaranteed by the spec, though, and as TLBs grow larger 
> there might be incentive to keep them online.)

i dont think it's required for C3 to even turn off any portion of the 
CPU - if an interrupt arrives after the C3 sequence is initiated but 
just before dirty cachelines have been flushed then the CPU can just 
return without touching anything (such as the TLB) - right? So i dont 
think there's any implicit guarantee of TLB flushing (nor should there 
be), but in practice, a good C3 sequence would (statistically) turn off 
large portions of the CPU and hence the TLB as well.

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2007-12-19 19:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-12-19 18:34 Venki Pallipadi
2007-12-19 19:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-19 19:36   ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-12-19 19:40     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-12-19 19:48       ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-12-19 20:23         ` Venki Pallipadi
2007-12-20  7:53         ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-12-20 16:16           ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-12-20 18:22             ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-12-20 18:32               ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-12-20 19:28             ` Len Brown
2007-12-19 19:56       ` Venki Pallipadi
2007-12-19 20:54   ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-20  2:08   ` Venki Pallipadi
2007-12-20  9:31     ` Ingo Molnar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20071219194032.GA8849@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®