[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20061020.122311.30184576.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 12:23:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: nickpiggin@...oo.com.au
Cc: ralf@...ux-mips.org, torvalds@...l.org, akpm@...l.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, anemo@....ocn.ne.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Fix COW D-cache aliasing on fork
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 00:39:40 +1000
> So moving the flush_cache_mm below the copy_page_range, to just
> before the flush_tlb_mm, would work then? This would make the
> race much smaller than with this patchset.
>
> But doesn't that still leave a race?
>
> What if another thread writes to cache after we have flushed it
> but before flushing the TLBs? Although we've marked the the ptes
> readonly, the CPU won't trap if the TLB is valid? There must be
> some special way for the arch to handle this, but I can't see it.
Also, it is actually the case that doing page-by-page cache flushes
can be cheaper than flush_mm_cache() on certain cpus. Very few cpus
that need this cache flushing provide a "context" based cache flush.
On cpus like the mentioned hypersparc, there is no way to do a
"context" flush of the cache, so we flush the entire multi-megabyte L2
cache. Actually, it allows to flush only "user" cache lines which
keeps the kernel cache lines in there, but still it's very expensive.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists