lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 06/17] arm: mmu_gather rework
From
Date
On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 12:44 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> unmap_region()
> tlb_gather_mmu()
> unmap_vmas()
> for (; vma; vma = vma->vm_next)
> unmao_page_range()
> tlb_start_vma() -> flush cache range

So why is this correct? Can't we race with a concurrent access to the
memory region (munmap() vs other thread access race)? While
unmap_region() callers will have removed the vma from the tree so faults
will not be satisfied, TLBs might still be present and allow us to
access the memory and thereby reloading it in the cache.

> zap_*_range()
> ptep_get_and_clear_full() -> batch/track external tlbs
> tlb_remove_tlb_entry() -> batch/track external tlbs
> tlb_remove_page() -> track range/batch page
> tlb_end_vma() -> flush tlb range
>
> [ for architectures that have hardware page table walkers
> concurrent faults can still load the page tables ]
>
> free_pgtables()
> while (vma)
> unlink_*_vma()
> free_*_range()
> *_free_tlb()
> tlb_finish_mmu()
>
> free vmas


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-02-28 15:23    [W:0.225 / U:0.372 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site