From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47C09B7C2F for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:22:39 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: Filtering bits in set_pte_at() From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Hugh Dickins In-Reply-To: References: <1256957081.6372.344.camel@pasglop> <1257200367.7907.50.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:22:26 +1100 Message-ID: <1257211346.7907.60.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 23:45 +0000, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > IE. update_mmu_cache() would be more generally useful if it took the > > ptep instead of the pte. Of course, I'm sure some embedded archs are > > going to cry for the added load here ... > > > > I like your idea. I'll look into doing a patch converting it and > will > > post it here. > > Well, I wasn't proposing > > update_mmu_cache(vma, address, ptep); > but > update_mmu_cache(vma, address, *ptep); > > which may not meet your future idea, but is much less churn for now > i.e. no change to any of the arch's update_mmu_cache(), > just a change to some of its callsites. I see... but if we go that way, I think we may as well do the whole churn... I'll have a look at how bad it is. Cheers, Ben.