| To: | Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [xfs-masters] Re: Interaction between Xen and XFS: stray RW mappings |
| From: | dean gaudet <dean@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 21 Oct 2007 20:18:41 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Morten Bøgeskov <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <200710151415.07248.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> |
| References: | <470FA7C3.90404@goop.org> <20071014225618.GN23367404@sgi.com> <4712A254.4090604@goop.org> <200710151415.07248.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> |
| Reply-to: | xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | xfs-masters-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Nick Piggin wrote: > Yes, as Dave said, vmap (more specifically: vunmap) is very expensive > because it generally has to invalidate TLBs on all CPUs. why is that? ignoring 32-bit archs we have heaps of address space available... couldn't the kernel just burn address space and delay global TLB invalidate by some relatively long time (say 1 second)? -dean |
| Previous by Date: | [xfs-masters] Re: Interaction between Xen and XFS: stray RW mappings, Jeremy Fitzhardinge |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [xfs-masters] Re: Interaction between Xen and XFS: stray RW mappings, dean gaudet |
| Previous by Thread: | [xfs-masters] Re: Interaction between Xen and XFS: stray RW mappings, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | [xfs-masters] Re: Interaction between Xen and XFS: stray RW mappings, Jeremy Fitzhardinge |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |