[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1189024666.10802.197.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 06:37:46 +1000
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>, stable@...nel.org,
Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix preemptible lazy mode bug
On Thu, 2007-08-23 at 22:46 -0700, Zachary Amsden wrote:
> I recently sent off a fix for lazy vmalloc faults which can happen under
> paravirt when lazy mode is enabled. Unfortunately, I jumped the gun a
> bit on fixing this. I neglected to notice that since the new call to
> flush the MMU update queue is called from the page fault handler, it can
> be pre-empted. Both VMI and Xen use per-cpu variables to track lazy
> mode state, as all previous calls to set, disable, or flush lazy mode
> happened from a non-preemptable state.
Hi Zach,
I don't think this patch does anything. The flush is because we want
the just-completed "set_pte" to have immediate effect, so if preempt is
enabled we're already screwed because we can be moved between set_pte
and the arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode() call.
Now, where's the problem caller? By my reading or rc4, vmalloc faults
are fixed up before enabling interrupts.
Confused,
Rusty.
-
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