On 28 August 2014 18:14, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote:
> PowerPC TCG flushes the TLB on every IR/DR change, which basically
> means on every user<->kernel context switch. Use the 6-element
> TLB array as a cache, where each MMU index is mapped to a different
> state of the IR/DR/PR/HV bits.
>
> This brings the number of TLB flushes down from ~900000 to ~50000
> for starting up the Debian installer, which is in line with x86
> and gives a ~10% performance improvement.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
> ---
> cputlb.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++
> hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c | 6 +++++-
> include/exec/exec-all.h | 5 +++++
> target-ppc/cpu.h | 4 +++-
> target-ppc/excp_helper.c | 6 +-----
> target-ppc/helper_regs.h | 52
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> target-ppc/translate_init.c | 5 +++++
> 7 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/cputlb.c b/cputlb.c
> index afd3705..17e1b03 100644
> --- a/cputlb.c
> +++ b/cputlb.c
> @@ -67,6 +67,25 @@ void tlb_flush(CPUState *cpu, int flush_global)
> tlb_flush_count++;
> }
>
> +void tlb_flush_idx(CPUState *cpu, int mmu_idx)
> +{
> + CPUArchState *env = cpu->env_ptr;
> +
> +#if defined(DEBUG_TLB)
> + printf("tlb_flush_idx %d:\n", mmu_idx);
> +#endif
> + /* must reset current TB so that interrupts cannot modify the
> + links while we are modifying them */
> + cpu->current_tb = NULL;
> +
> + memset(env->tlb_table[mmu_idx], -1, sizeof(env->tlb_table[mmu_idx]));
> + memset(cpu->tb_jmp_cache, 0, sizeof(cpu->tb_jmp_cache));
> +
> + env->tlb_flush_addr = -1;
> + env->tlb_flush_mask = 0;
Isn't this going to break huge page support? Consider
the case:
* set up huge pages in one TLB index (causing tlb_flush_addr
and tlb_flush_mask to be set to cover that range)
* switch to a different TLB index
* tlb_flush_idx() for that index (causing flush_addr/mask to
be reset)
* switch back to first TLB index
* do tlb_flush_page for an address inside the huge-page
region
I think you need the flush addr/mask to be per-TLB-index
if you want this to work.
Personally I would put the "implement new feature in core
code" in a separate patch from "use new feature in PPC code".
Does PPC hardware do lots of TLB flushes on user-kernel
transitions, or does it have some sort of info in the TLB
entry about whether it should match or not? (I'm wondering
if there's a generalisation possible here that might help ARM
too.)
-- PMM
