Michael Ellerman writes:
> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 04:33:24PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>> From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V"
>>
>> If a hash bucket gets full, we "evict" a more/less random entry from it.
>> When we do that we don't invalidate the TLB (hpte_remove) because we assume
>> the old trans
On Sat, 2013-06-01 at 21:19 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 04:33:24PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V"
> >
> > If a hash bucket gets full, we "evict" a more/less random entry from it.
> > When we do that we don't invalidate the TLB (hpte_remove
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 04:33:24PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V"
>
> If a hash bucket gets full, we "evict" a more/less random entry from it.
> When we do that we don't invalidate the TLB (hpte_remove) because we assume
> the old translation is still technically "valid
From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V"
If a hash bucket gets full, we "evict" a more/less random entry from it.
When we do that we don't invalidate the TLB (hpte_remove) because we assume
the old translation is still technically "valid". This implies that when
we are invalidating or updating pte, even if HPTE