[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170619132913.se67bp4addreqovn@node.shutemov.name>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 16:29:13 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...opsys.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/3] mm: Do not loose dirty and access bits in
pmdp_invalidate()
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 03:40:41PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 05:52:23PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > -void pmdp_invalidate(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address,
> > +pmd_t pmdp_invalidate(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address,
> > pmd_t *pmdp)
> > {
> > - pmd_t entry = *pmdp;
> > - set_pmd_at(vma->vm_mm, address, pmdp, pmd_mknotpresent(entry));
> > - flush_pmd_tlb_range(vma, address, address + HPAGE_PMD_SIZE);
> > + pmd_t old = pmdp_establish(pmdp, pmd_mknotpresent(*pmdp));
> > + if (pmd_present(old))
> > + flush_pmd_tlb_range(vma, address, address + HPAGE_PMD_SIZE);
> > + return old;
> > }
> > #endif
>
> The pmd_present() check added above is superflous because there's no
> point to call pmdp_invalidate if the pmd is not present (present as in
> pmd_present) already. pmd_present returns true if _PAGE_PSE is set
> and it was always set before calling pmdp_invalidate.
>
> It looks like we could skip the flush if _PAGE_PRESENT is not set
> (i.e. for example if the pmd is PROTNONE) but that's not what the above
> pmd_present will do.
You are right. We seems don't have a generic way to check the entry is
present to CPU.
I guess I'll drop the check then.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists