On 09.09.2010, at 20:13, Hollis Blanchard wrote: > On 09/09/2010 04:16 AM, Liu Yu-B13201 wrote: >> Yes, it's hard to resume TLB0. We only resume TLB1 in previous code. >> But TLB1 is even more smaller (13 free entries) than 440, >> So that it still has little possibility to get hit. >> thus the resumption is useless. >> > The only reason hits are unlikely in TLB1 is because you still don't have > large page support in the host. Once you have that, you can use TLB1 for > large guest mappings, and it will become extremely likely that you get hits > in TLB1. This is true even if the guest wants 256MB but the host supports > only e.g. 16MB large pages, and must split the guest mapping into multiple > large host pages. > > When will you have hugetlbfs for e500? That's going to make such a dramatic > difference, I'm not sure it's worth investing time in optimizing the MMU code > until then.
I'm not sure I agree. Sure, huge pages give another big win, but the state as is should at least be fast enough for prototyping. Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
