Re: [RFC] Simple ioremap cache
flat view
From: Eugene Surovegin <hidden>
Date: 2004-06-07 08:48:12
On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 09:46:16AM +0200, Marius Groeger wrote:
I'm not sure, however, whether your current patch actually saves _TLB_ misses.
Huh? Let's consider two drivers - serial & emac on 44x. Both of them ioremap different parts of the same phys page, but without the patch these will be _different_ virtual mappings, e.g. if they access their respective I/O registers _two_ TLB entries will be used. Here is real example (see my original e-mail): UART0 ioremaps 0x0000000140000200 and gets 0xfdfea200 as a virtual kernel address EMAC0 ioremaps 0x0000000140000800 and gets 0xd1000800. You'll need _two_ TLB entries for these mappings: 0xfdfea000 -> 0x0000000140000000 0xd1000000 -> 0x0000000140000000 With my patch only _one_ TLB mapping will be required for _all_ 4K-sized ioremaps of 0x0000000140000000: 0xfdfea000 -> 0x0000000140000000 440GP has a 64 entry TLB and believe me, when you are running user mode app, there are a lot of TLB misses, and decreasing TLB pressure (e.g. requiring less TLB entries for driver I/O) _will_ save you some TLB misses.
Have you counted them to prove it?
No, it seemed quite obvious to me :)
To do this, I think you also need to flag a bigger virtual page size to the MMU, eg. program a different PAGESZ_* value (see include/asm-ppc/mmu.h). If you don't, the MMU has to manage diffent chunks all the same, they just happen to be virtually contiguous.
I don't follow you here, sorry. Could you give some examples with the real TLB contents for the cases you are describing?
So I think what you're saving right now is just mapping entries (which also is a valid thing to gain).
What do you mean "just mapping entries" ? TLB slots contain these "mapping entries", that's the whole purpose of TLB. Eugene. ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/