linux-kernel - Re: [patch 0/4] [RFC] MMU Notifiers V1

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1201295921.6815.150.camel@pasglop>
Date:	Sat, 26 Jan 2008 08:18:41 +1100
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...ranet.com>
Cc:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>, Robin Holt <holt@....com>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>, Izik Eidus <izike@...ranet.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, kvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, steiner@....com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	daniel.blueman@...drics.com, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] [RFC] MMU Notifiers V1


On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 12:42 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 09:56:06PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > Andrea's mmu_notifier #4 -> RFC V1
> > 
> > - Merge subsystem rmap based with Linux rmap based approach
> > - Move Linux rmap based notifiers out of macro
> > - Try to account for what locks are held while the notifiers are
> >   called.
> > - Develop a patch sequence that separates out the different types of
> >   hooks so that it is easier to review their use.
> > - Avoid adding #include to linux/mm_types.h
> > - Integrate RCU logic suggested by Peter.
> 
> I'm glad you're converging on something a bit saner and much much
> closer to my code, plus perfectly usable by KVM optimal rmap design
> too. It would have preferred if you would have sent me patches like
> Peter did for review and merging etc... that would have made review
> especially easier. Anyway I'm used to that on lkml so it's ok, I just
> need this patch to be included in mainline, everything else is
> irrelevant to me.

Also, wouldn't there be a problem with something trying to use that
interface to keep in sync a secondary device MMU such as the DRM or
other accelerators, which might need virtual address based
invalidation ?

Ben.


--
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/