[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250905184355.GR616306@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2025 15:43:55 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Vasant Hegde <vasant.hegde@....com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Yi Lai <yi1.lai@...el.com>,
iommu@...ts.linux.dev, security@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] mm: Introduce deferred freeing for kernel page
tables
On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 01:51:01PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ASYNC_PGTABLE_FREE
> +void pagetable_free_async(struct ptdesc *pt);
> +#else
> +static inline void pagetable_free_async(struct ptdesc *pt)
> +{
> + __pagetable_free(pt);
> +}
> +#endif
I'd probably call this function pagetable_free_kernel() ? Weird to
call it async when it isn't async..
ptdesc_clear_kernel()?
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(pt, next, &page_list, pt_list) {
> + list_del(&pt->pt_list);
The list_del isn't necessary, it doesn't zero the list, just _safe
iteration is fine.
Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists