From: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Cc: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>, Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@qumranet.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>, Izik Eidus <izike@qumranet.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
steiner@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, daniel.blueman@quadrics.com,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] mmu_notifier: Core code
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 05:56:39 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080126115639.GQ26420@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801251206390.7856@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
> > > 1. invalidate_all()
> >
> > That will be fine as long as we can unregister the ops notifier and free
> > the structure. Otherwise, we end up being called needlessly.
>
> No you cannot do that because there are still callbacks that come later.
> The invalidate_all may lead to invalidate_range() doing nothing for this
> mm. The ops notifier and the freeing of the structure has to wait until
> release().
Could you be a little more clear here? If you are saying that the other
callbacks will need to do work? I can assure you we will clean up those
pages and raise memory protections. It will also be done in a much more
efficient fashion than the individual callouts.
If, on the other hand, you are saying we can not because of the way
we traverse the list, can we return a result indicating to the caller
we would like to be unregistered and then the mmu_notifier code do the
remove followed by a call to the release notifier?
>
> > > 2. invalidate_range() for each vma
> > >
> > > 3. release()
> > >
> > > We cannot simply move the call up because there will be future range
> > > callbacks on vma invalidation.
> >
> > I am not sure what this means. Right now, if you were to notify XPMEM
> > the process is exiting, we would take care of all the recalling of pages
> > exported by this process, clearing those pages cache lines from cache,
> > and raising memory protections. I would assume that moving the callout
> > earlier would expect the same of every driver.
>
> That does not sync with the current scheme of the invalidate_range()
> hooks. We would have to do a global invalidate early and then place the
> other invalidate_range hooks in such a way that none is called in later in
> process exit handling.
But if the notifier is removed from the list following the invalidate_all
callout, there would be no additional callouts.
Thanks,
Robin
--
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:[~2008-01-26 11:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-25 5:56 [patch 0/4] [RFC] MMU Notifiers V1 Christoph Lameter
2008-01-25 5:56 ` [patch 1/4] mmu_notifier: Core code Christoph Lameter
2008-01-25 18:39 ` Robin Holt
2008-01-25 18:47 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-25 18:56 ` Robin Holt
2008-01-25 19:03 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-25 19:35 ` Robin Holt
2008-01-25 20:10 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-26 11:56 ` Robin Holt [this message]
2008-01-28 18:51 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-25 21:18 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-26 12:01 ` Robin Holt
2008-01-28 18:44 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-25 5:56 ` [patch 2/4] mmu_notifier: Callbacks to invalidate address ranges Christoph Lameter
2008-01-25 5:56 ` [patch 3/4] mmu_notifier: invalidate_page callbacks for subsystems with rmap Christoph Lameter
2008-01-25 5:56 ` [patch 4/4] MMU notifier: invalidate_page callbacks using Linux rmaps Christoph Lameter
2008-01-25 11:42 ` [patch 0/4] [RFC] MMU Notifiers V1 Andrea Arcangeli
2008-01-25 12:43 ` Robin Holt
2008-01-25 18:31 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-25 21:18 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-01-25 21:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-28 16:10 ` Izik Eidus
2008-01-28 17:25 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-01-28 19:04 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-28 19:40 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2008-01-28 20:16 ` Christoph Lameter
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-02-01 5:04 [patch 0/4] [RFC] EMMU Notifiers V5 Christoph Lameter
2008-02-01 5:04 ` [patch 1/4] mmu_notifier: Core code Christoph Lameter
2008-02-01 10:55 ` Robin Holt
2008-02-01 11:04 ` Robin Holt
2008-02-01 19:14 ` Christoph Lameter
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=20080126115639.GQ26420@sgi.com \
--to=holt@sgi.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=andrea@qumranet.com \
--cc=avi@qumranet.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=daniel.blueman@quadrics.com \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=izike@qumranet.com \
--cc=kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=steiner@sgi.com \
/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).