From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757239Ab0GIPGW (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jul 2010 11:06:22 -0400 Received: from claw.goop.org ([74.207.240.146]:60891 "EHLO claw.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751332Ab0GIPGV (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jul 2010 11:06:21 -0400 Message-ID: <4C373AEC.6000502@goop.org> Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 08:06:20 -0700 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100621 Fedora/3.0.5-1.fc13 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrea Arcangeli CC: Stefano Stabellini , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: mmu notifier calls in apply_to_page_range() X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I just noticed that the original mmu notifier change (cddb8a5c14a) adds calls to mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start/end to apply_to_page_range(). This doesn't seem correct to me, since apply_to_page_range can perform arbitrary operations to the range of pages, not just invalidation of the pages. It seems to me that the appropriate mmu notifiers should be called either around the call to apply_to_page_range(), or from within the callback function. Andrea, what's the rationale for mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start/end here? Thanks, J