[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7d00705a-8a6b-48a5-8aba-7e789c536e2e@antgroup.com>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 23:36:51 +0800
From: "Bang Li" <libang.li@...group.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
chenhuacai@...nel.org, tsbogend@...ha.franken.de, paul.walmsley@...ive.com,
palmer@...belt.com, chris@...kel.net, jcmvbkbc@...il.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
loongarch@...ts.linux.dev, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
ryan.roberts@....com, ioworker0@...il.com, libang.linux@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] mm: Refactor update_mmu_tlb()
Hi David,
Thanks for you review!
On 2024/5/21 17:36, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 18.05.24 09:49, Bang Li wrote:
>> Remove update_mmu_tlb() from those architectures and define
>> generically via update_mmu_tlb_range(), removing the ability
>> for arches to override it.
>
> I'd suggest something like
>
> "mm: implement update_mmu_tlb() using update_mmu_tlb_range()
>
> Let's make update_mmu_tlb() simply a generic wrapper around
> update_mmu_tlb_range(). Only the latter can now be overridden by the
> architecture. We can now remove __HAVE_ARCH_UPDATE_MMU_TLB as well.
> "
Agree! Thank you for your suggestion, I will modify it in the next version
>
> [...]
>
>> +#ifndef update_mmu_tlb_range
>> +static inline void update_mmu_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>> + unsigned long address, pte_t *ptep, unsigned int nr)
>> +{
>> +}
>> +#endif
>
> With that in patch #1
Thanks again.
Bang
>
> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists