[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220125163806.bhepto3ccl4xnqef@revolver>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 16:38:22 +0000
From: Liam Howlett <liam.howlett@...cle.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
CC: "maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org" <maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.ibm.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken.cr@...il.com>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...gle.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
Rom Lemarchand <romlem@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 36/66] um: Remove vma linked list walk
* Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> [220118 13:41]:
> On 12/1/21 15:30, Liam Howlett wrote:
> > From: "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
> >
> > Use the VMA iterator instead.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@...radead.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Liam R. Howlett <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
> > ---
> > arch/um/kernel/tlb.c | 14 ++++++--------
> > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/um/kernel/tlb.c b/arch/um/kernel/tlb.c
> > index bc38f79ca3a3..25f043037d76 100644
> > --- a/arch/um/kernel/tlb.c
> > +++ b/arch/um/kernel/tlb.c
> > @@ -584,21 +584,19 @@ void flush_tlb_mm_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long start,
> >
> > void flush_tlb_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
> > {
> > - struct vm_area_struct *vma = mm->mmap;
> > + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > + VMA_ITERATOR(vmi, mm, 0);
> >
> > - while (vma != NULL) {
> > + for_each_vma(vmi, vma)
> > fix_range(mm, vma->vm_start, vma->vm_end, 0);
> > - vma = vma->vm_next;
> > - }
> > }
> >
> > void force_flush_all(void)
> > {
> > struct mm_struct *mm = current->mm;
> > - struct vm_area_struct *vma = mm->mmap;
> > + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > + MA_STATE(mas, &mm->mm_mt, 0, 0);
> >
> > - while (vma != NULL) {
> > + mas_for_each(&mas, vma, ULONG_MAX)
>
> Is there a reason to use the iterator in one case and mas_for_each in the other?
No, I will changed the second one to the vma iterator. Thanks.
>
> > fix_range(mm, vma->vm_start, vma->vm_end, 1);
> > - vma = vma->vm_next;
> > - }
> > }
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists