Re: [RFC] mm: Generalize notify_page_fault()

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 05:31:15PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> On 05/30/2019 04:36 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > The two handle preemption differently.  Why is x86 wrong and this one
> > correct?
> 
> Here it expects context to be already non-preemptible where as the proposed
> generic function makes it non-preemptible with a preempt_[disable|enable]()
> pair for the required code section, irrespective of it's present state. Is
> not this better ?

git log -p arch/x86/mm/fault.c

search for 'kprobes'.

tell me what you think.