From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:09:05 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmu notifiers #v7 Message-ID: <20080229130905.GS8091@v2.random> References: <20080219231157.GC18912@wotan.suse.de> <20080220010941.GR7128@v2.random> <20080220103942.GU7128@v2.random> <20080221045430.GC15215@wotan.suse.de> <20080221144023.GC9427@v2.random> <20080221161028.GA14220@sgi.com> <20080227192610.GF28483@v2.random> <20080229004001.GN8091@v2.random> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Jack Steiner , Nick Piggin , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Robin Holt , Avi Kivity , Izik Eidus , kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Peter Zijlstra , general@lists.openfabrics.org, Steve Wise , Roland Dreier , Kanoj Sarcar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, daniel.blueman@quadrics.com List-ID: On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 05:03:01PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > I thought you wanted to get rid of the sync via pte lock? Sure. _notify is happening inside the pt lock by coincidence, to reduce the changes to mm/* as long as the mmu notifiers aren't sleep capable. > What changes to do_wp_page do you envision? Converting it to invalidate_range_begin/end. > What is the trouble with the current do_wp_page modifications? There is > no need for invalidate_page() there so far. invalidate_range() does the > trick there. No trouble, it's just that I didn't want to mangle over the logic of do_wp_page unless it was strictly required, the patch has to be obviously safe. You need to keep that bit of your patch to make the mmu notifiers sleepable. -- 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: email@kvack.org