Re: [PATCH] mmu notifiers #v5
From: Christoph Lameter
Date: Tue Feb 05 2008 - 01:11:36 EST
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 11:09:01AM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> >
> > > > Right but that pin requires taking a refcount which we cannot do.
> > >
> > > GRU can use my patch without the pin. XPMEM obviously can't use my
> > > patch as my invalidate_page[s] are under the PT lock (a feature to fit
> > > GRU/KVM in the simplest way), this is why an incremental patch adding
> > > invalidate_range_start/end would be required to support XPMEM too.
> >
> > Doesnt the kernel in some situations release the page before releasing the
> > pte lock? Then there will be an external pte pointing to a page that may
> > now have a different use. Its really bad if that pte does allow writes.
>
> Sure the kernel does that most of the time, which is for example why I
> had to use invalidate_page instead of invalidate_pages inside
> zap_pte_range. Zero problems with that (this is also the exact reason
> why I mentioned the tlb flushing code would need changes to convert
> some page in pages).
Zero problems only if you find having a single callout for every page
acceptable. So the invalidate_range in your patch is only working
sometimes. And even if it works then it has to be used on 2M range. Seems
to be a bit fragile and needlessly complex.
"conversion of some page in pages"? A proposal to defer the freeing of the
pages until after the pte_unlock?
--
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/