[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170510055727.g6wojjiis36a6nvm@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 07:57:27 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bpetkov@...e.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 09/10] x86/mm: Rework lazy TLB to track the actual loaded mm
* Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> On Sun, 7 May 2017, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > /* context.lock is held for us, so we don't need any locking. */
> > static void flush_ldt(void *current_mm)
> > {
> > + struct mm_struct *mm = current_mm;
> > mm_context_t *pc;
> >
> > - if (current->active_mm != current_mm)
> > + if (this_cpu_read(cpu_tlbstate.loaded_mm) != current_mm)
>
> While functional correct, this really should compare against 'mm'.
>
> > return;
> >
> > - pc = ¤t->active_mm->context;
> > + pc = &mm->context;
So this appears to be the function:
static void flush_ldt(void *current_mm)
{
struct mm_struct *mm = current_mm;
mm_context_t *pc;
if (this_cpu_read(cpu_tlbstate.loaded_mm) != current_mm)
return;
pc = &mm->context;
set_ldt(pc->ldt->entries, pc->ldt->size);
}
why not rename 'current_mm' to 'mm' and remove the 'mm' local variable?
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists