RE: Hugetlb demanding paging for -mm tree

Seth, Rohit
2004-08-11T06:36:10Z

William Lee Irwin III <> wrote on Tuesday, August 10, 2004 5:45 PM:

> William Lee Irwin III <mailto:wli@holomorphy.com> wrote on Tuesday,
>>> Could you rephrase that? I'm having trouble figuring out what you
>>> meant.
>
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 05:28:27PM -0700, Seth, Rohit wrote:
>> I was thinking that we only need to worry about the d-cache
>> coherency at the time of hugepage fault. But that is not a safe
>> assumption. You are right that we will need update_mmu_cache in the
>> hugetlb page fault path. Though I'm wondering if we can hide this
>> update_mmu_cache fucntionality behind the arch specific set_huge_pte
>> function in the demand paging patch for hugepage. If so then we may
>> not need to make any changes in the existing update_mmu_cache API.
>
> Most arches seem to be okay with the API, but it may be more
> useful/etc. to e.g. explicitly pass the page size, particularly when
> constant folding is possible.
>
>

Are you working on the patch to provide this updated API for
update_mmu_cache.