On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 06:35:47PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:31:57AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > NUMA PTE scanning is expensive both in terms of the scanning itself and > > the TLB flush if there are any updates. Currently non-present PTEs are > > accounted for as an update and incurring a TLB flush where it is only > > necessary for anonymous migration entries. This patch addresses the > > problem and should reduce TLB flushes. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <[email protected]> > > --- > > mm/mprotect.c | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/mm/mprotect.c b/mm/mprotect.c > > index 1f9b54b..1e9cef0 100644 > > --- a/mm/mprotect.c > > +++ b/mm/mprotect.c > > @@ -109,8 +109,9 @@ static unsigned long change_pte_range(struct > > vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd, > > make_migration_entry_read(&entry); > > set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte, > > swp_entry_to_pte(entry)); > > + > > + pages++; > > } > > - pages++; > > } > > } while (pte++, addr += PAGE_SIZE, addr != end); > > arch_leave_lazy_mmu_mode(); > > Should we fold this into patch 7 ?
Looking closer at it, I think folding it into the patch would overload the purpose of patch 7 a little too much but I shuffled the series to keep the patches together. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
