From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 22:15:13 -0600 From: Robin Holt Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] mmu_notifier: Core code Message-ID: <20080201041512.GF26420@sgi.com> References: <20080131045750.855008281@sgi.com> <20080131045812.553249048@sgi.com> <20080201035249.GE26420@sgi.com> 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: Robin Holt , Andrea Arcangeli , 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 07:58:40PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Robin Holt wrote: > > > > + void (*invalidate_range_end)(struct mmu_notifier *mn, > > > + struct mm_struct *mm, int atomic); > > > > I think we need to pass in the same start-end here as well. Without it, > > the first invalidate_range would have to block faulting for all addresses > > and would need to remain blocked until the last invalidate_range has > > completed. While this would work, (and will probably be how we implement > > it for the short term), it is far from ideal. > > Ok. Andrea wanted the same because then he can void the begin callouts. > > The problem is that you would have to track the start-end addres right? Yep. We will probably no do that in the next week, but I would expect we have that working before we submit xpmem again. We will probably just chain them up in a regular linked list. 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