@@ -366,6 +366,18 @@ static inline void flush_tlb_page(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long a)
void native_flush_tlb_others(const struct cpumask *cpumask,
const struct flush_tlb_info *info);
+static inline void arch_tlbbatch_should_defer(struct mm_struct *mm)
+{
+ bool should_defer = false;
+
+ /* If remote CPUs need to be flushed then defer batch the flush */
+ if (cpumask_any_but(mm_cpumask(mm), get_cpu()) < nr_cpu_ids)
+ should_defer = true;
+ put_cpu();
+
+ return should_defer;
+}
+
static inline void arch_tlbbatch_add_mm(struct arch_tlbflush_unmap_batch *batch,
struct mm_struct *mm)
{
@@ -627,17 +627,10 @@ static void set_tlb_ubc_flush_pending(struct mm_struct *mm, bool writable)
*/
static bool should_defer_flush(struct mm_struct *mm, enum ttu_flags flags)
{
- bool should_defer = false;
-
if (!(flags & TTU_BATCH_FLUSH))
return false;
- /* If remote CPUs need to be flushed then defer batch the flush */
- if (cpumask_any_but(mm_cpumask(mm), get_cpu()) < nr_cpu_ids)
- should_defer = true;
- put_cpu();
-
- return should_defer;
+ return arch_tlbbatch_should_defer(mm);
}
/*
The entire scheme of deferred TLB flush in reclaim path rests on the fact that the cost to refill TLB entries is less than flushing out individual entries by sending IPI to remote CPUs. But architecture can have different ways to evaluate that. Hence apart from checking TTU_BATCH_FLUSH in the TTU flags, rest of the decision should be architecture specific. Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> --- arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h | 12 ++++++++++++ mm/rmap.c | 9 +-------- 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)