From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Subject: Re: PTE access rules & abstraction
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:31:26 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1222147886.12085.93.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080923031037.GA11907@wotan.suse.de>
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 05:10 +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> We are getting better slowly I think (eg. you note that set_pte_at is
> no longer used as a generic "do anything"), but I won't dispute that
> this whole area could use an overhaul; a document for all the rules,
> a single person or point of responsibility for those rules...
Can we nowadays -rely- on set_pte_at() never being called to overwrite
an already valid PTE ? I mean, it looks like the generic code doesn't do
it anymore but I wonder if it's reasonable to forbid that from coming
back ? That would allow me to remove some hacks in ppc64 and simplify
some upcoming ppc32 code.
Cheers,
Ben.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Subject: Re: PTE access rules & abstraction
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:31:26 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1222147886.12085.93.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080923031037.GA11907@wotan.suse.de>
On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 05:10 +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> We are getting better slowly I think (eg. you note that set_pte_at is
> no longer used as a generic "do anything"), but I won't dispute that
> this whole area could use an overhaul; a document for all the rules,
> a single person or point of responsibility for those rules...
Can we nowadays -rely- on set_pte_at() never being called to overwrite
an already valid PTE ? I mean, it looks like the generic code doesn't do
it anymore but I wonder if it's reasonable to forbid that from coming
back ? That would allow me to remove some hacks in ppc64 and simplify
some upcoming ppc32 code.
Cheers,
Ben.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-23 5:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-09-19 17:42 PTE access rules & abstraction Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-19 17:42 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-22 6:22 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-22 6:22 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-22 21:05 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-22 21:05 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-23 3:10 ` Nick Piggin
2008-09-23 3:10 ` Nick Piggin
2008-09-23 3:16 ` David Miller
2008-09-23 3:16 ` David Miller, Nick Piggin
2008-09-23 5:35 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-23 5:35 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-23 6:18 ` Nick Piggin
2008-09-23 6:18 ` Nick Piggin
2008-09-23 5:31 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2008-09-23 5:31 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-23 6:13 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-23 6:13 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-23 6:49 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-23 6:49 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-23 9:50 ` Nick Piggin
2008-09-23 9:50 ` Nick Piggin
2008-09-23 11:54 ` peter
2008-09-23 11:54 ` peter
2008-09-24 18:45 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-09-24 18:45 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-09-24 21:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-24 21:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-24 21:57 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-24 21:57 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-24 22:07 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-24 22:07 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-24 22:43 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-24 22:43 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-24 22:53 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-24 22:53 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-24 23:55 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-09-24 23:55 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-09-25 1:04 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-25 1:04 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-25 18:15 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-25 18:15 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-25 21:44 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-25 21:44 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-25 22:27 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-25 22:27 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-25 23:02 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-25 23:02 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-24 22:17 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2008-09-24 22:17 ` Martin Schwidefsky
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1222147886.12085.93.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.