On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 16:24 -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > > This saved another 1% or so. I don't think TLB_SCRATCH needs to be saved > by crit/debug/mcheck -- they shouldn't be taking TLB misses, at least > in the bolted case.
The code they call will (think accessing the UART) > Even non-bolted, it doesn't look like there are enough > extlb levels to deal with a linear TLB miss inside a crit/debug/mcheck > inside a linear TLB miss inside a virtual page table miss inside a normal > TLB miss. My plan for crit/debug/mcheck (which I haven't implemented yet) was to save the whole TLB save area onto the kernel stack and restore it. > Currently, we could just as well take that crit/debug/mcheck after > storing to TLB_SCRATCH but before saving it to extlb, and have the same > problem. Right. My point was more that TLB_SCRATCH itself shall be saved somewhere by the crit/debug/mcheck handler along with the copy of the TLB save area. Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
