[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 01 of 12] Core of mmu notifiers
    On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

    > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 11:09:35AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
    > > Why is there still the hlist stuff being used for the mmu notifier list?
    > > And why is this still unsafe?
    > What's the problem with hlist, it saves 8 bytes for each mm_struct,
    > you should be using it too instead of list.

    list heads in mm_struct and in the mmu_notifier struct seemed to
    be more consistent. We have no hash list after all.

    > > There are cases in which you do not take the reverse map locks or mmap_sem
    > > while traversing the notifier list?
    > There aren't.

    There is a potential issue in move_ptes where you call
    invalidate_range_end after dropping i_mmap_sem whereas my patches did the
    opposite. Mmap_sem saves you there?

     \ /
      Last update: 2008-04-23 20:29    [W:0.018 / U:1.868 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site