[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1712140118160.260574@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 01:19:20 -0800 (PST)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
cc: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay@...il.com>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@...el.com>,
Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] mm, mmu_notifier: annotate mmu notifiers with
blockable invalidate callbacks
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017, Christian König wrote:
> > > > --- a/drivers/misc/sgi-gru/grutlbpurge.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/misc/sgi-gru/grutlbpurge.c
> > > > @@ -298,6 +298,7 @@ struct gru_mm_struct
> > > > *gru_register_mmu_notifier(void)
> > > > return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> > > > STAT(gms_alloc);
> > > > spin_lock_init(&gms->ms_asid_lock);
> > > > + gms->ms_notifier.flags = 0;
> > > > gms->ms_notifier.ops = &gru_mmuops;
> > > > atomic_set(&gms->ms_refcnt, 1);
> > > > init_waitqueue_head(&gms->ms_wait_queue);
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/gntdev.c b/drivers/xen/gntdev.c
> > > There is a kzalloc() just above this:
> > > gms = kzalloc(sizeof(*gms), GFP_KERNEL);
> > >
> > > Is that not sufficient to clear the 'flags' field?
> > >
> > Absolutely, but whether it is better to explicitly document that the mmu
> > notifier has cleared flags, i.e. there are no blockable callbacks, is
> > another story. I can change it if preferred.
>
> Actually I would invert the new flag, in other words specify that an MMU
> notifier will never sleep.
>
Very good idea, I'll do that. I'll also move the flags member to ops as
Paolo suggested.
Thanks both!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists