[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: PTE access rules & abstraction
    On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 11:15 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
    > The ptep_modify_prot_start/commit pair specifies a single pte update in
    > such a way to allow more implementation flexibility - ie, there's no
    > naked requirement for an atomic fetch-and-clear operation. I chose the
    > transaction-like terminology to emphasize that the start/commit
    > functions must be strictly paired; there's no way to fail or abort the
    > "transaction". A whole group of those start/commit pairs can be batched
    > together without affecting their semantics.

    I still can't see the point of having now 3 functions instead of just
    one such as ptep_modify_protection(). I don't see what it buys you other
    than adding gratuituous new interfaces.


     \ /
      Last update: 2008-09-25 23:51    [W:0.035 / U:23.048 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site