Re: [Revert] Re: [PATCH] mm: sync vmalloc address space page tablesin alloc_vm_area()

[Andrew Morton]

On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 13:37:46 -0700
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 09/01/2011 09:11 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 12:51:03PM +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> >> From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Andrew,
> >
> > I was wondering if you would be Ok with this patch for 3.1.
> >
> > It is a revert (I can prepare a proper revert if you would like
> > that instead of this patch).

David's patch looks better than a straight reversion.

Problem is, I can't find David's original email anywhere.  Someone's
been playing games with To: headers?

> > The users of this particular function (alloc_vm_area) are just
> > Xen. There are no others.
> 
> I'd prefer to put explicit vmalloc_sync_all()s in the callsites where
> necessary,

What would that patch look like?  Bear in mind that we'll need something
suitable for 3.1 and for a 3.0 backport.

> and ultimately try to work out ways of avoiding it altogether
> (like have some hypercall wrapper which touches the arg memory to make
> sure its mapped?).

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/