[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c24c32bd-085d-460a-833a-a982eb5becaa@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 13:59:20 +0100
From: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@...nel.org>
To: Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@...ux.dev>, andreas@...sler.com,
richard.weiyang@...il.com, will@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
aneesh.kumar@...nel.org, npiggin@...il.com, dev.jain@....com,
ioworker0@...il.com, linmag7@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 7/8] mm: convert __HAVE_ARCH_TLB_REMOVE_TABLE to
CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_TLB_REMOVE_TABLE config
On 2/6/26 12:58, Qi Zheng wrote:
>
>
> On 2/6/26 7:45 PM, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
>> On 2/6/26 12:13, Qi Zheng wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ah, It's just simply aligned with the MMU_GATHER_RCU_TABLE_FREE above.
>>
>> But does that work as expected for !SMP?
>
> In the case of !SMP, tlb_remove_table() will not be called:
>
> static inline void pgtable_free_tlb(struct mmu_gather *tlb, void *table,
> bool is_page)
> {
> pgtable_free(table, is_page);
> }
Ah, okay. Confusing stuff. Would have been nice to document/mention that
in the patch description.
So if it compiles, all good
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <david@...nel.org>
--
Cheers,
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists