[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1266445892.16346.306.camel@pasglop>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 09:31:32 +1100
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>,
"Shilimkar, Santosh" <santosh.shilimkar@...com>,
Matthew Dharm <mdharm-kernel@...-eyed-alien.net>,
Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>,
"Mankad, Maulik Ojas" <x0082077@...com>,
Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>,
Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: USB mass storage and ARM cache coherency
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 20:44 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> No, because that'd probably bugger up the Sparc64 method of delaying
> flush_dcache_page.
>
> This method works as follows:
>
> - a page cache page is allocated - this has PG_arch_1 clear.
>
> - IO happens on it and it's placed into the page cache. PG_arch_1 is
> still clear.
>
> - someone calls read()/write() which accesses the page. The generic
> file IO layers call flush_dcache_page() in response to
> read()/write()
> fs calls. flush_dcache_page() spots that the page is not yet mapped
> into userspace, and sets PG_arch_1 to mark the fact that the kernel
> mapping is dirty.
>
> - when someone maps the page, we check PG_arch_1 in update_mmu_cache.
> If PG_arch_1 is set, we flush the kernel mapping.
>
> Clearly, if we go around having drivers clearing PG_arch_1, this is
> going to break horribly.
Ok, you do things very differently than us on ppc then. We clear
PG_arch_1 in flush_dcache_page(), and we set it when the page has been
cache cleaned for execution.
We assume that anybody that dirties a page in the kernel will call
flush_dcache_page() which removes our PG_arch_1 bit thus marking the
page "dirty".
Note that from experience, doing the check & flushes in
update_mmu_cache() is racy on SMP. At least for I$/D$, we have the case
where processor one does set_pte followed by update_mmu_cache(). The
later isn't done yet but processor 2 sees the PTE now and starts using
it, cache hasn't been fully flushed yet. You may avoid that race in some
ways, but on ppc, I've stopped using that.
I now do things directly in set_pte_at(). In fact, that's why I want
your patch to change update_mmu_cache() to take a PTE pointer :-) Since
my set_pte_at() can now remove the _PAGE_EXEC bit, I need
update_mmu_cache() to re-read the PTE before it updates the hash table
or TLB.
Cheers,
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists