[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210618033728.GA16787@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 11:37:28 +0800
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Geoff Levand <geoff@...radead.org>,
Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>,
Dongsheng Yang <dongsheng.yang@...ystack.cn>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
dm-devel@...hat.com, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/18] mm: add a kunmap_local_dirty helper
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 08:01:57PM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
>
> > + flush_kernel_dcache_page(__page); \
>
> Is this required on 32bit systems? Why is kunmap_flush_on_unmap() not
> sufficient on 64bit systems? The normal kunmap_local() path does that.
>
> I'm sorry but I did not see a conclusion to my query on V1. Herbert implied the
> he just copied from the crypto code.[1] I'm concerned that this _dirty() call
> is just going to confuse the users of kmap even more. So why can't we get to
> the bottom of why flush_kernel_dcache_page() needs so much logic around it
> before complicating the general kernel users.
>
> I would like to see it go away if possible.
This thread may be related:
https://lwn.net/Articles/240249/
Cheers,
--
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
Powered by blists - more mailing lists