Re: Non-GPL export of invalidate_mmap_range

[Daniel Phillips]

Hi Paul,

> I cannot think of any reasonable alternative to passing the parameter
> down either, as it certainly does not be reasonable to duplicate the
> code...

Yes, it's simply the (small) price that has to be paid in order to be able to 
boast about our accurate semantics.

> How about something like "private_too" instead of "zap"?

How about just "all", which is what we mean.

> > -void zap_page_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > -			unsigned long address, unsigned long size)
> > +void invalidate_page_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>
> Would it be useful for this to be inline?  (Wouldn't seem so,
> zapping mappings has enough overhead that an extra level of
> function call should be deep down in the noise...)

Yes, it doesn't seem worth it just to save a stack frame.

Actually, I erred there in that invalidate_mmap_range should not export the 
flag, because it never makes sense to pass in non-zero from a DFS.

> Doesn't the new argument need to be passed down through
> invalidate_mmap_range_list()?

It does, thanks for the catch.  Please bear with me for a moment while I 
reroll this, then hopefully we can move on to the more interesting discussion 
of whether it's worth it.  (Yes it is :)

Regards,

Daniel

-
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/