From: David Miller <davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>
To: michal.simek-g5w7nrANp4BDPfheJLI6IQ@public.gmane.org
Cc: linux-arch-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
ltp-list-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org,
arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
lethal-M7jkjyW5wf5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org,
mingo-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: mmap hw behavior
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 11:06:24 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090708.110624.104984745.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A54DF6F.1010405-g5w7nrANp4BDPfheJLI6IQ@public.gmane.org>
From: Michal Simek <michal.simek-g5w7nrANp4BDPfheJLI6IQ@public.gmane.org>
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:03:27 +0200
> David Miller wrote:
>> From: Michal Simek <michal.simek-g5w7nrANp4BDPfheJLI6IQ@public.gmane.org>
>> Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:03:11 +0200
>>
>>
>>> When I call mmap for that open file with pointer to calloc place
>>> (first parameter, + length zero) it should be one tlb invalidation
>>> for calloc and new tlb which connect open file. We check it and we
>>> don't have any tlb invalidation that's why I think that kernel do
>>> different thigs. Or is it there any copying? Or anything different?
>>>
>>
>> There is no need to tlb flush the calloc area unless that memory area
>> is actually touched by the user application and thus the page is
>> faulted in.
>>
> That calloc area is filled by any value (in that test). Is it mean that
> for this case when calloc area is touched
> there must be tlb invalidation + remapping?
Yes, if the calloc area is written to by the application, there
should be a tlb flush when the mmap() overrides that virtual region
with a different mapping.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge
This is your chance to win up to $100,000 in prizes! For a limited time,
vendors submitting new applications to BlackBerry App World(TM) will have
the opportunity to enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge. See full prize
details at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/Challenge
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: michal.simek@petalogix.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
mingo@elte.hu, arnd@arndb.de, lethal@linux-sh.org,
ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: mmap hw behavior
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 11:06:24 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090708.110624.104984745.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
Message-ID: <20090708180624.vP1ha-54Ke16S0LsNh-7vswEw1oJrWeVcYoM5LVHphQ@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A54DF6F.1010405@petalogix.com>
From: Michal Simek <michal.simek@petalogix.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:03:27 +0200
> David Miller wrote:
>> From: Michal Simek <michal.simek@petalogix.com>
>> Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:03:11 +0200
>>
>>
>>> When I call mmap for that open file with pointer to calloc place
>>> (first parameter, + length zero) it should be one tlb invalidation
>>> for calloc and new tlb which connect open file. We check it and we
>>> don't have any tlb invalidation that's why I think that kernel do
>>> different thigs. Or is it there any copying? Or anything different?
>>>
>>
>> There is no need to tlb flush the calloc area unless that memory area
>> is actually touched by the user application and thus the page is
>> faulted in.
>>
> That calloc area is filled by any value (in that test). Is it mean that
> for this case when calloc area is touched
> there must be tlb invalidation + remapping?
Yes, if the calloc area is written to by the application, there
should be a tlb flush when the mmap() overrides that virtual region
with a different mapping.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-08 18:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-08 17:03 mmap hw behavior Michal Simek
2009-07-08 17:03 ` Michal Simek
2009-07-08 17:35 ` David Miller
2009-07-08 18:03 ` Michal Simek
[not found] ` <4A54DF6F.1010405-g5w7nrANp4BDPfheJLI6IQ@public.gmane.org>
2009-07-08 18:06 ` David Miller [this message]
2009-07-08 18:06 ` David Miller
2009-07-08 20:22 ` Michal Simek
2009-07-09 1:15 ` David Miller
2009-07-09 5:40 ` Michal Simek
2009-07-09 8:57 ` Michal Simek
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=20090708.110624.104984745.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem-ft/pcqaiutieiz0/mpfg9q@public.gmane.org \
--cc=arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org \
--cc=lethal-M7jkjyW5wf5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-arch-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=ltp-list-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org \
--cc=michal.simek-g5w7nrANp4BDPfheJLI6IQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=mingo-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).