mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: "CHADHA,VINEET" <vineet@ufl.edu>
Cc: nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vineet@ufl.edu
Subject: Re: TLB evaluation for Linux
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 06:43:53 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080902064353.09cf4a48@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1942732773.182121220328723728.JavaMail.osg@osgjas04.cns.ufl.edu>

On Tue, 2 Sep 2008 00:12:03 -0400 (EDT)
"CHADHA,VINEET" <vineet@ufl.edu> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I have been working to evaluate TLB performance for Linux O/S and 
> virtualized workloads(such as Xen) in a Full system simulator(e.g. 
> simics). While my evaluation is in nascent stage, I do notice that 
> most of the IPIs in multi-core environments cause complete TLB 
> Flush.

note that linux only does an ipi to processors that actually are
currently running a thread of the same program (or a kernel thread).
Old versions didn't do this (they also IPI'd idle processors), but
on modern cpus and modern kernels that's not supposed to happen anymore
(the C-states that flush the tlb anyway now do the kernel side
bookkeeping as well to avoid the wakeup+useless flush)
> 
> I want to evaluate cost of TLB shootdown including re-population 
> vs. each entry shootdown (invlpg). While a similar study has been 
> done in other kernels (e.g. L4 kernel), I am not aware if it has 
> been done for Linux O/S.
> 

one of the problems is that invlpg is rather expensive; in long-ago
experiments the threshold was like around a handful of pages already.
At that point.. all the bookkeeping isn't likely to be a win.
Esp since a tlb refill on x86 is quite cheap. 

-- 
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org

  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-09-02 13:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-09-02  4:12 CHADHA,VINEET
2008-09-02  4:39 ` Nick Piggin
2008-09-02  6:31 ` Andi Kleen
2008-09-02 13:43 ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2008-09-02 14:36 CHADHA,VINEET
2008-09-02 14:59 CHADHA,VINEET
2008-09-02 15:38 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-09-02 16:14 CHADHA,VINEET

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=20080902064353.09cf4a48@infradead.org \
    --to=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=vineet@ufl.edu \
    /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

Powered by JetHome