[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <015301d1d751$8973de50$9c5b9af0$@alibaba-inc.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 14:42:16 +0800
From: "Hillf Danton" <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com>
To: "'Martin Schwidefsky'" <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Cc: "'linux-kernel'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] s390/mm: use ipte range to invalidate multiple page table entries
> > >
> > > +void ptep_invalidate_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long start,
> > > + unsigned long end, pte_t *ptep)
> > > +{
> > > + unsigned long nr;
> > > +
> > > + if (!MACHINE_HAS_IPTE_RANGE || mm_has_pgste(mm))
> > > + return;
> > > + preempt_disable();
> > > + nr = (end - start) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > > + /* If the flush is likely to be local skip the ipte range */
> > > + if (nr && !cpumask_equal(mm_cpumask(mm),
> > > + cpumask_of(smp_processor_id())))
> >
> > s/smp/raw_smp/ to avoid adding schedule entry with page table
> > lock held?
>
> There can not be a schedule entry with either the page table lock held
> or the preempt_disable() a few lines above.
>
Yes, Sir.
> > > + __ptep_ipte_range(start, nr - 1, ptep);
> > > + preempt_enable();
Then would you please, Sir, take a look at another case where
preempt is enabled?
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(ptep_invalidate_range);
> > > +
> >
thanks
Hillf
Powered by blists - more mailing lists