From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Cc: mbligh@aracnet.com, rmk@arm.linux.org.uk,
James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rmap 22 flush_dcache_mmap_lock
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 15:40:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040504154057.73770fe8.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0405042320100.2156-100000@localhost.localdomain>
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com> wrote:
>
> --- rmap21/include/asm-i386/cacheflush.h 2003-10-08 20:24:56.000000000 +0100
> +++ rmap22/include/asm-i386/cacheflush.h 2004-05-04 21:21:50.956096280 +0100
> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@
> #define flush_cache_range(vma, start, end) do { } while (0)
> #define flush_cache_page(vma, vmaddr) do { } while (0)
> #define flush_dcache_page(page) do { } while (0)
> +#define flush_dcache_mmap_lock(mapping) do { } while (0)
> +#define flush_dcache_mmap_unlock(mapping) do { } while (0)
Looks like this patch will break a lot of architectures. Was that
intentional?
If not, and if you expect that all other architectures do not need the lock
then the above could be cast as:
#ifndef flush_dcache_mmap_lock
#define flush_dcache_mmap_lock(mapping) do { } while (0)
#define flush_dcache_mmap_unlock(mapping) do { } while (0)
#endif
in some generic file.
wrt overloading of tree_lock: The main drawback is that the VM lock ranking
is now dependent upon the architecture. That, plus the dang thing is
undocumented!
And it seems strange to be grabbing that lock expecting that it will
protect the tree which is elsewhere protected by a different lock. You
sure this is correct?
I wonder if it wouldn't be better to simply make i_shared_lock irq-safe?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-04 22:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-05-04 22:18 [PATCH] rmap 20 i_mmap_shared into i_mmap Hugh Dickins
2004-05-04 22:19 ` [PATCH] rmap 21 try_to_unmap_one mapcount Hugh Dickins
2004-05-04 22:22 ` [PATCH] rmap 22 flush_dcache_mmap_lock Hugh Dickins
2004-05-04 22:40 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2004-05-05 0:12 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-05-04 22:53 ` James Bottomley
2004-05-05 0:29 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-05-04 22:28 ` [PATCH] rmap 23 empty flush_dcache_mmap_lock Hugh Dickins
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=20040504154057.73770fe8.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbligh@aracnet.com \
--cc=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
/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