Re: [patches] [PATCH] [28/34] i386: pte xchg optimization

2007-05-02 Thread Zachary Amsden
Andi Kleen wrote: I always wondered why the xchg is necessary here at all. If the process of tearing down a page table entry has started, other users of the mapped linear address are broken anyway - why is it necessary to still monitor the effect they may have on the A/D bits, unless this is a tr

Re: [patches] [PATCH] [28/34] i386: pte xchg optimization

2007-05-02 Thread Andi Kleen
> I always wondered why the xchg is necessary here at all. If the process of > tearing down a page table entry has started, other users of the mapped > linear address are broken anyway - why is it necessary to still monitor the > effect they may have on the A/D bits, unless this is a transient tea

Re: [patches] [PATCH] [28/34] i386: pte xchg optimization

2007-05-02 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 30.04.07 17:50 >>> > >From: Zachary Amsden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >In situations where page table updates need only be made locally, and there is >no cross-processor A/D bit races involved, we need not use the heavyweight >xchg instruction to atomically fetch and c