[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080109165515.4a6256a8@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:55:15 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Pavel Roskin <proski@....org>, Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Pekka Paalanen <pq@....fi>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jbeulich@...ell.com
Subject: Re: Replacement for page fault notifiers?
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:47:16 +0100
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org> writes:
> >
> > I'm btw all in favor of making mmio tracing full fledged kernel
> > infrastructure. This doesn't mean "notifier" imo; this means a real
> > flag in the struct page, and then the page fault code can do
> >
> > if (page->flags & FLAG_MMIO_TRACED)
> > mmio_trace(page, regs, whatever..);
> >
> > (probably surrounded by a CONFIG_ ifdef)
> > THis is a TON lighter than a notifier chain, and actually what you
> > want, you don't really want a notifier, you want a call back when a
> > special kind of page is touched.
>
> That would assume that your mmio area has a struct page. In most PCs
> the ones in the PCI hole don't
>
so you also call the function for all traps on pages without struct page;
that should be extremely rare anyway, and the mmio_trace code can then
look the page up.
--
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@...ux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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