Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 16 Feb 2007 23:29:57 +0000 | Subject | Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [patch 12/21] Xen-paravirt: Allocate and free vmalloc areas | From | Keir Fraser <> |
| |
On 16/2/07 19:26, "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:
> Keir Fraser wrote: >> Hmmm... Actually looks like a bunch of architectures do lazy sync of the >> vmalloc area, although neither ia64 nor powerpc does so. However, all >> current users of the alloc_vm_area() function would be okay since none of >> the other lazy-syncing architectures are supported by Xen. >> > > Well, assuming that alloc_vm_area() has some non-Xen use, the right > thing is for archs to export vmalloc_sync_all(), and just use that from > common code.
It has no other users right now and get_vm_area_sync() would be a better-named and more generically useful function than alloc_vm_area(). But yes, to be done properly it does require vmalloc_sync_all() to be defined by all architectures (even if that's BUG() and implement-properly-on-demand).
get_vm_area_sync(), partnered with existing remove_vm_area(), just seems much smaller and neater than adding four new functions with a more complex usage: alloc_vm_area, {lock,unlock}_vm_area, and free_vm_area. Maybe keeping free_vm_area() too makes sense as its interface is more neatly symmetrical to that of get_vm_area().
-- Keir
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |