lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: apparent regressions from TLB range flushing page set
>>> On 22.08.12 at 10:54, Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com> wrote:
> On 08/22/2012 03:39 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
>>>>> Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com> 08/22/12 5:24 AM >>>
>>> On 08/20/2012 10:12 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> I was thought you have 'Agreed' for xen part code. :)
>>
>> I had agreed to it being done the right way, and I had pointed out the
>> problem once. I can't say for sure that I looked at the most recent rev
>> closely enough to spot the issue still being unfixed.
>>
>>>> For one, while TLB_FLUSH_ALL gets passed as 'end' argument to
>>>> flush_tlb_others(), the Xen code was made to check its 'start'
>>>> parameter.
>>>
>>> Do you mean need the following change? --untested.
>>
>> Yes. I'd question though whether for that special case it shouldn't be
>> start _and_ end to get passed the special value.
>
>
> Actually the special value is already there in old code.
> so, what's your meaning of the question?

I'm saying that I'd rather see

#define flush_tlb_mm(mm) flush_tlb_mm_range(mm, TLB_FLUSH_ALL, TLB_FLUSH_ALL, 0UL)

Jan



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-08-22 16:01    [W:0.069 / U:0.120 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site