Re: [patch 2/4] mmu_notifier: Callbacks to invalidate addressranges
From: Andrea Arcangeli
Date: Sat Feb 02 2008 - 21:24:31 EST
On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 05:35:28PM -0600, Robin Holt wrote:
> No, we need a callout when we are becoming more restrictive, but not
> when becoming more permissive. I would have to guess that is the case
> for any of these callouts. It is for both GRU and XPMEM. I would
> expect the same is true for KVM, but would like a ruling from Andrea on
> that.
I still hope I don't need to take any lock in _range_start and that
losing coherency (w/o risking global memory corruption but only
risking temporary userland data corruption thanks to the page pin) is
ok for KVM.
If I would have to take a lock in _range_start like XPMEM is forced to
do (GRU is by far not forced to it, if it would switch to my #v5) then
it would be a problem.
--
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/