lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Sep]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] powerpc: mm: Check if serialize_against_pte_lookup() really needs to run
From
Date
Hello Aneesh, thanks for the feedback!

On Tue, 2019-09-17 at 08:26 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> We could possibly avoid that serialize for a full task exit unmap. ie,
> when tlb->fullmm == 1 . But that won't help the Qemu case because it
> does an umap of the guest ram range for which tlb->fullmm != 1.
Yes, in qemu we can hot-add memory to guests using memory allocated by
qemu using mmap(). If we want/need to free this memory to other
processes (or guests), we remove it from this guest and do a common
munmap(). This happens without exiting qemu, or pausing the guest.


> That is not correct. We need to keep the count updated across the
> local_irq_disable()/local_irq_enable().
So, by that you mean incrementing the counter before
local_irq_{disable,save} and decrementing only after
local_irq_{enable,restore}?

> That is we mostly should have a variant like
> start_lockless_pgtbl_walk()/end_lockless_pgtbl_walk().
And with that, you mean replacing the current local_irq_{disable,save}
with a start_lockless_pgtbl_walk() (that contains increment + irq
disable)? (and doing similarly with local_irq_{enable,restore} and
end_lockless_pgtbl_walk())

> Also there is hash_page_mm which we need to make sure we are protected
> against w.r.t collapse pmd.
I did not get what I need to do here.
Is it a new thing to protect?
If so, I need to better understand how to protect it.
If not, I would like to understand how it's protected by current
behavior.

> Move that to ppc64 specific mm_context_t.
Ok, fixed! I will send that on v2.

Best regards,
Leonardo Bras
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-09-17 23:22    [W:0.063 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site