Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fixup write permission of TLB on powerpc e500 core

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 09:49 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> In the meantime, other than rewriting the futex code to not require
> those in-atomic accesses (can't it just access the pages via the linear
> mapping and/or kmap after the gup ?),

That'll wreck performance on things like ARM and SPARC that have to deal
with cache aliasing.

>  all I see would be a way to force
> dirty and young after gup, with appropriate locks, or a variant of gup
> (via a flag ?) to require it to do so. 

Again, _WHY_ isn't gup(.write=1) a complete write fault? Its supposed to
be, it needs to break COW, do dirty page tracking and call page_mkwrite.
I'm still thinking this e500 stuff is smoking crack.

ARM has no hardware dirty bit either, and yet it works for them. I can't
exactly tell how because I got lost in there, but it does, again,
suggest e500 is on crack.
--
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/