Re: [patch 0/6] fault vs truncate/invalidate race fix

[Dave Airlie]

On 2/27/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:36:03 +1100 "Dave Airlie" <airlied@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > I've also got rid of the horrible populate API, and integrated nonlinear pages
> > > properly with the page fault path.
> > >
> > > Downside is that this adds one more vector through which the buffered write
> > > deadlock can occur. However this is just a very tiny one (pte being unmapped
> > > for reclaim), compared to all the other ways that deadlock can occur (unmap,
> > > reclaim, truncate, invalidate). I doubt it will be noticable. At any rate, it
> > > is better than data corruption.
> > >
> > > I hope these can get merged (at least into -mm) soon.
> >
> > Have these been put into mm?
>
> Not yet - I need to get back on the correct continent, review the code,
> stuff like that.  It still hurts that this work makes the write() deadlock
> harder to hit, and we haven't worked out how to fix that.
>
> > can I expect them in the next -mm so I
> > can start merging up the drm memory manager code to my -mm tree..
>
> What is the linkage between these patches and DRM?

the new fault hander made the memory manager code a lot cleaner and
very less hacky in a lot of cases. so I'd rather merge the clean code
than have to fight with the current code...

Dave.
-
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/