[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:0.088 / U:0.272 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site