From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 11:27:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH 01 of 12] Core of mmu notifiers In-Reply-To: <20080423181928.GI24536@duo.random> Message-ID: References: <20080422223545.GP24536@duo.random> <20080422230727.GR30298@sgi.com> <20080423133619.GV24536@duo.random> <20080423144747.GU30298@sgi.com> <20080423155940.GY24536@duo.random> <20080423181928.GI24536@duo.random> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Robin Holt , Nick Piggin , Jack Steiner , Peter Zijlstra , kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Kanoj Sarcar , Roland Dreier , Steve Wise , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Avi Kivity , linux-mm@kvack.org, general@lists.openfabrics.org, Hugh Dickins , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Rusty Russell List-ID: On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 11:09:35AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > Why is there still the hlist stuff being used for the mmu notifier list? > > And why is this still unsafe? > > What's the problem with hlist, it saves 8 bytes for each mm_struct, > you should be using it too instead of list. list heads in mm_struct and in the mmu_notifier struct seemed to be more consistent. We have no hash list after all. > > > There are cases in which you do not take the reverse map locks or mmap_sem > > while traversing the notifier list? > > There aren't. There is a potential issue in move_ptes where you call invalidate_range_end after dropping i_mmap_sem whereas my patches did the opposite. Mmap_sem saves you there? -- 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