Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 10 Apr 2019 16:41:57 -0700 | From | Ira Weiny <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v6 7/8] mm/mmu_notifier: pass down vma and reasons why mmu notifier is happening v2 |
| |
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 12:47:46PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: > From: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> > > CPU page table update can happens for many reasons, not only as a result > of a syscall (munmap(), mprotect(), mremap(), madvise(), ...) but also > as a result of kernel activities (memory compression, reclaim, migration, > ...). > > Users of mmu notifier API track changes to the CPU page table and take > specific action for them. While current API only provide range of virtual > address affected by the change, not why the changes is happening > > This patch is just passing down the new informations by adding it to the > mmu_notifier_range structure. > > Changes since v1: > - Initialize flags field from mmu_notifier_range_init() arguments > > Signed-off-by: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> > Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org > Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com> > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com> > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com> > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> > Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> > Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> > Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> > Cc: Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com> > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com> > Cc: Ross Zwisler <zwisler@kernel.org> > Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> > Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> > Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> > Cc: Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@amd.com> > Cc: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com> > Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com> > Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org > Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > --- > include/linux/mmu_notifier.h | 6 +++++- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/mmu_notifier.h b/include/linux/mmu_notifier.h > index 62f94cd85455..0379956fff23 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mmu_notifier.h > +++ b/include/linux/mmu_notifier.h > @@ -58,10 +58,12 @@ struct mmu_notifier_mm { > #define MMU_NOTIFIER_RANGE_BLOCKABLE (1 << 0) > > struct mmu_notifier_range { > + struct vm_area_struct *vma; > struct mm_struct *mm; > unsigned long start; > unsigned long end; > unsigned flags; > + enum mmu_notifier_event event; > }; > > struct mmu_notifier_ops { > @@ -363,10 +365,12 @@ static inline void mmu_notifier_range_init(struct mmu_notifier_range *range, > unsigned long start, > unsigned long end) > { > + range->vma = vma; > + range->event = event; > range->mm = mm; > range->start = start; > range->end = end; > - range->flags = 0; > + range->flags = flags;
Which of the "user patch sets" uses the new flags?
I'm not seeing that user yet. In general I don't see anything wrong with the series and I like the idea of telling drivers why the invalidate has fired.
But is the flags a future feature?
For the series:
Reviewed-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
Ira
> } > > #define ptep_clear_flush_young_notify(__vma, __address, __ptep) \ > -- > 2.20.1 >
| |