[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0802041113130.24187@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 11:13:53 -0800 (PST)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...ranet.com>
cc: Robin Holt <holt@....com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>,
Izik Eidus <izike@...ranet.com>,
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
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] mmu_notifier: Core code
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 07:58:40PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > Ok. Andrea wanted the same because then he can void the begin callouts.
>
> Exactly. I hope the page-pin will avoid me having to serialize the KVM
> page fault against the start/end critical section.
>
> BTW, I wonder if the start/end critical section API is intended to
> forbid scheduling inside it. In short I wonder if GRU can is allowed
> to take a spinlock in _range_start as last thing before returning, and
> to release that same spinlock in _range_end as first thing, and not to
> be forced to use a mutex.
_begin/end encloses code that may sleep and _begin/_end itself may sleep.
So a semaphore may work but not a spinlock.
--
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