On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 12:57 -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
cpu_last_thread_in_core(cpu) is a moving target. You want something
like:
cpu = cpu_first_thread_in_core(cpu);
last = cpu_last_thread_in_core(cpu);
while (cpu = last) {
__clear_bit(id, stale_map[cpu]);
cpu++;
}
On Aug 2, 2009, at 9:03 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Sat, 2009-08-01 at 08:29 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2009-07-30 at 22:35 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
/* XXX This clear should ultimately be part of
local_flush_tlb_mm */
- __clear_bit(id,
On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 11:21 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Aug 2, 2009, at 9:03 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Sat, 2009-08-01 at 08:29 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2009-07-30 at 22:35 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
/* XXX This clear should ultimately be part of
On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 12:06 -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 11:21 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Aug 2, 2009, at 9:03 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
for (cpu = cpu_first_thread_in_core(cpu);
cpu = cpu_last_thread_in_core(cpu); cpu++)
__clear_bit(id,
for (cpu = cpu_first_thread_in_core(cpu);
cpu = cpu_last_thread_in_core(cpu); cpu++)
__clear_bit(id, stale_map[cpu]);
==
cpu = cpu_first_thread_in_core(cpu);
while (cpu = cpu_last_thread_in_core(cpu)) {
__clear_bit(id, stale_map[cpu]);
cpu++;
}
cpu = 0
On Sat, 2009-08-01 at 08:29 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2009-07-30 at 22:35 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
/* XXX This clear should ultimately be part of
local_flush_tlb_mm */
- __clear_bit(id, stale_map[cpu]);
+ for (cpu =
On Thu, 2009-07-30 at 22:35 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
/* XXX This clear should ultimately be part of
local_flush_tlb_mm */
- __clear_bit(id, stale_map[cpu]);
+ for (cpu = cpu_first_thread_in_core(cpu);
+ cpu =
On Jul 24, 2009, at 4:15 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
The current no hash MMU context management code is written with
the assumption that one CPU == one TLB. This is not the case on
implementations that support HW multithreading, where several
linux CPUs can share the same TLB.
This adds
On Jul 30, 2009, at 10:12 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Jul 24, 2009, at 4:15 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
The current no hash MMU context management code is written with
the assumption that one CPU == one TLB. This is not the case on
implementations that support HW multithreading, where
The current no hash MMU context management code is written with
the assumption that one CPU == one TLB. This is not the case on
implementations that support HW multithreading, where several
linux CPUs can share the same TLB.
This adds some basic support for this to our context management
and our
The current no hash MMU context management code is written with
the assumption that one CPU == one TLB. This is not the case on
implementations that support HW multithreading, where several
linux CPUs can share the same TLB.
This adds some basic support for this to our context management
and our
11 matches
Mail list logo
