From owner-freebsd-current Thu Jul 11 16:26:20 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FB1C37B405; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:26:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from canning.wemm.org (canning.wemm.org [192.203.228.65]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A2FE43E64; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:26:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from fw.wemm.org (canning.wemm.org [192.203.228.65]) by canning.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 973732A7F2; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:26:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from overcee.wemm.org (overcee.wemm.org [10.0.0.3]) by fw.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 365C04C284; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:26:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from wemm.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEDDD38CC; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:26:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: John Baldwin Cc: Matthew Dillon , Julian Elischer , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, Alfred Perlstein Subject: Re: Proposed fix for SMP vm_zeroidle.c In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:26:14 -0700 From: Peter Wemm Message-Id: <20020711232614.CEDDD38CC@overcee.wemm.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG John Baldwin wrote: > > On 11-Jul-2002 Matthew Dillon wrote: > > Here is my proposed fix for the page-zeroing problem w/ SMP. It > > is untested (I'm about to test it)... I'm looking for comments on > > the concept. If the comments are positive and my testing succeeds I > > will commit it tonight. > > > > Basically the idea is simple. Provide a function that mi_switch() can > > call when switching in a thread. The page zeroing code sets this > > function to cpu_invlpg(CADDR3) on switch-in, thus dealing with any > > potential switch between cpu's with virtually no overhead (no overhead > > that we care about anyway). > > > > I daresay that this mechanism could be used for a number of other > > purposes as well. > > > > What do you think? > > Sounds fine to me. I'm not sure it will be all that useful for other > things in the future but it conveniently solves the problem at hand > at least. ARRGH!! NOOOO!!! I've almost completely replaced this code! I suggested a function for activation a few days ago too, but was going to leave it till after this commit, which I hoped to get done today. This reactivates PG_G for SMP and avoids global invltlb's when we can do finer grained shootdowns. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message