mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Cliff Wickman <cpw@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4] SGI UV: TLB shootdown using broadcast assist unit
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:18:45 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200806122318.45397.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080612125605.GA26760@sgi.com>

On Thursday 12 June 2008 22:56, Cliff Wickman wrote:
> Hi Nick,
>
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:35:29PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > On Thursday 12 June 2008 22:23, Cliff Wickman wrote:

> > For someone not too familiar with low level x86 (or UV) code, can
> > you explain why you are hooking at this point? I mean, what it
> > looks like is either a performance improvement, or for some reason
> > UV does not support send_IPI_mask out to CPUs "not on the local node".
>
> Yes, a performance improvement.  The UV machine has hardware for
> broadcasting messages to a set of nodes (represented in a bit mask).  The
> messages will raise interrupts at each of the target nodes and provide
> the message - all in one step.
> (IPI is supported.  In fact this patch falls back to the IPI method
>  if all the cpus on the remote nodes do not respond.)

Thanks, that makes it perfectly clear to me now (the intent, not
the details of the code :))

So long as this raises a maskable interrupt on each target CPU, it
doesn't break x86's lockless get_user_pages :)


> > If the former, what sort of improvement to you expect / see?
>
> Good question.  The hardware does not exist yet.  But using IPI there
> would be one set of packets exchanged to deliver the interrupts and
> another set to pull over the flush address, just to start the operation.
> I expect the improvement to be significant.

Ah, so you can send a small message with the IPI, and that can be
decoded and used by the target without invoking the cc protocol.
Seems like pretty sweet functionality.

I guess TLB flushing is an obvious candidate, but it could be
quite useful for other operations as well. I wonder if it couldn't
be used to create a slightly more advanced API (than send_IPI)
which other platforms can just implement using cache coherency for
the payload...

For example, some classes of smp_call_function could use this too.

But for now I don't see anything wrong with getting this patch
upstream and looking to generalise it later.

  reply	other threads:[~2008-06-12 13:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-06-12 12:23 Cliff Wickman
2008-06-12 12:35 ` Nick Piggin
2008-06-12 12:56   ` Cliff Wickman
2008-06-12 13:18     ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2008-06-12 14:28       ` Cliff Wickman
2008-06-12 13:11 ` 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=200806122318.45397.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=cpw@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    /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®