[lkml]   [2001]   [Feb]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: x86 ptep_get_and_clear question
Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Ok, Is there one case were your pragmatic solutions is vastly faster?

> * mprotect: No. The difference is at most one additional locked
> instruction for each pte.

Oh, what instruction is that?

> * munmap(anon): No. We must handle delayed accessed anyway (don't call
> free_pages_ok() until flush_tlb_ipi returned). The difference is that we
> might have to perform a second pass to clear any spurious 0x40 bits.

That second pass is what I had in mind.

> * munmap(file): No. Second pass required for correct msync behaviour.

It is?

-- Jamie

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.143 / U:1.404 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site