Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 20 Feb 2008 00:11:57 +0100 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [patch] my mmu notifiers |
| |
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 02:58:51PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 09:43:57AM +0100, Nick Piggin wrote: > > anything when changing the pte to be _more_ permissive, and I don't > > Note that in my patch the invalidate_pages in mprotect can be > trivially switched to a mprotect_pages with proper params. This will > prevent page faults completely in the secondary MMU (there will only > be tlb misses after the tlb flush just like for the core linux pte), > and it'll allow all the secondary MMU pte blocks (512/1024 at time > with my PT lock design) to be updated to have proper permissions > matching the core linux pte.
Sorry, I realise I still didn't get this through my head yet (and also have not seen your patch recently). So I don't know exactly what you are doing...
But why does _anybody_ (why does Christoph's patches) need to invalidate when they are going to be more permissive? This should be done lazily by the driver, I would have thought.
| |