[PATCH -v3 0/2] arm, tlbflush: avoid TLBI broadcast if page reused in write fault

[Huang, Ying]

Huang Ying <ying.huang at linux.alibaba.com> writes:

> This series is to optimize the system performance via avoiding TLBI
> broadcast if page is reused in the write protect fault handler.  More
> details of the background and the test results can be found in [2/2].
>
> Changelog:
>
> v3:
>
> - Various code cleanup and improved design and document in [1/2],
>   Thanks Lorenzo and David's comments!
> - Fixed a typo and improved function interface in [2/2], Thanks Ryan's
>   comments!
>
> v2:
>
> - Various code cleanup in [1/2], Thanks David's comments!
> - Remove unnecessary __local_flush_tlb_page_nosync() in [2/2], Thanks Ryan's comments!
> - Add missing contpte processing, Thanks Rayn and Catalin's comments!
>
> Huang Ying (2):
>   mm: add spurious fault fixing support for huge pmd
>   arm64, tlbflush: don't TLBI broadcast if page reused in write fault
>
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h  | 14 ++++---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c           |  3 +-
>  arch/arm64/mm/fault.c             |  2 +-
>  include/linux/huge_mm.h           |  2 +-
>  include/linux/pgtable.h           |  4 ++
>  mm/huge_memory.c                  | 33 ++++++++++------
>  mm/internal.h                     |  2 +-
>  mm/memory.c                       | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  9 files changed, 140 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)

Hi, Andrew and Catalin,

This patchset needs to be merged across trees.  [1/2] is a mm change,
[2/2] is an arm64 change, and [2/2] depends on [1/2].  Because the
user-visible change is in arm64, I think it may be slightly better to
merge the patchset through the arm64 tree.  The opposite way works for
me too.  If you were OK with the patchset itself, which way do you
prefer?

---
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying