From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:23:22 -0600 From: Robin Holt Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmu notifiers #v5 Message-ID: <20080201022321.GZ26420@sgi.com> References: <20080131045750.855008281@sgi.com> <20080131171806.GN7185@v2.random> <20080131232842.GQ7185@v2.random> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Andrea Arcangeli , Robin Holt , Avi Kivity , Izik Eidus , kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Peter Zijlstra , steiner@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, daniel.blueman@quadrics.com List-ID: On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 05:37:21PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Fri, 1 Feb 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > I appreciate the review! I hope my entirely bug free and > > strightforward #v5 will strongly increase the probability of getting > > this in sooner than later. If something else it shows the approach I > > prefer to cover GRU/KVM 100%, leaving the overkill mutex locking > > requirements only to the mmu notifier users that can't deal with the > > scalar and finegrined and already-taken/trashed PT lock. > > Mutex locking? Could you be more specific? I think he is talking about the external locking that xpmem will need to do to ensure we are not able to refault pages inside of regions that are undergoing recall/page table clearing. At least that has been my understanding to this point. Thanks, Robin -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org