On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Rik van Riel <r...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> However, clearing the accessed bit does not lead to any
> consistency issues, there is no reason to flush the TLB
> immediately. The TLB flush can be deferred until some
> later point in time.
Ugh. I absolutely detest this patch.
If we're going to leave the TLB dirty, then dammit, leave it dirty.
Don't play some half-way games.
Here's the patch you should just try:
int ptep_clear_flush_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
unsigned long address, pte_t *ptep)
{
return ptep_test_and_clear_young(vma, address, ptep);
}
instead of complicating things.
Rationale: if the working set is so big that we start paging things
out, we sure as hell don't need to worry about TLB flushing. It will
flush itself.
And conversely - if it doesn't flush itself, and something stays
marked as "accessed" in the TLB for a long time even though we've
cleared it in the page tables, we don't care, because clearly there
isn't enough memory pressure for the accessed bit to matter.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
