From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/mm: clarify "prev" usage in switch_mm_irqs_off()
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 08:48:17 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <88cb9996-0e9b-49ec-bc94-f816a5b64870@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240126080644.1714297-2-yosryahmed@google.com>
On 1/26/24 00:06, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> +/*
> + * The "prev" argument passed by the caller does not always match CR3. For
> + * example, the scheduler passes in active_mm when switching from lazy TLB mode
> + * to normal mode, but switch_mm_irqs_off() can be called from x86 code without
> + * updating active_mm. Use cpu_tlbstate.loaded_mm instead.
> + */
> +void switch_mm_irqs_off(struct mm_struct *unused, struct mm_struct *next,
> struct task_struct *tsk)
One nit here: It's not obvious that "unused" is 'the "prev" argument'.
Would something like this be more clear?
/*
* This optimizes when not actually switching mm's. Some architectures
* use the 'unused' argument for this optimization, but x86 must use
* 'cpu_tlbstate.loaded_mm' instead because it does not always keep
* ->active_mm up to date.
*/
Also, I think it might be useful to have the rule that arch/x86 code
_always_ calls switch_mm_irqs_off() with the first argument (the
newly-named 'unused') set to NULL. I think there's only one site:
> void switch_mm(struct mm_struct *prev, struct mm_struct *next,
> struct task_struct *tsk)
> {
> unsigned long flags;
>
> local_irq_save(flags);
> switch_mm_irqs_off(prev, next, tsk);
> local_irq_restore(flags);
> }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-22 16:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-26 8:06 [PATCH 1/2] x86/mm: delete unused cpu argument to leave_mm() Yosry Ahmed
2024-01-26 8:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86/mm: clarify "prev" usage in switch_mm_irqs_off() Yosry Ahmed
2024-02-22 16:48 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2024-02-22 18:43 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-02-22 18:47 ` Dave Hansen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=88cb9996-0e9b-49ec-bc94-f816a5b64870@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yosryahmed@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox