Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:45:27 -0700 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: Hugetlb demanding paging for -mm tree |
| |
William Lee Irwin III <mailto:wli@holomorphy.com> wrote on Tuesday, >> Could you rephrase that? I'm having trouble figuring out what you >> meant.
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 05:28:27PM -0700, Seth, Rohit wrote: > I was thinking that we only need to worry about the d-cache coherency at > the time of hugepage fault. But that is not a safe assumption. You are > right that we will need update_mmu_cache in the hugetlb page fault path. > Though I'm wondering if we can hide this update_mmu_cache fucntionality > behind the arch specific set_huge_pte function in the demand paging > patch for hugepage. If so then we may not need to make any changes in > the existing update_mmu_cache API.
Most arches seem to be okay with the API, but it may be more useful/etc. to e.g. explicitly pass the page size, particularly when constant folding is possible.
-- wli - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |