From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Daniel Phillips Subject: Re: [RFC] Page table sharing Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 00:59:13 +0100 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Linus Torvalds , dmccr@us.ibm.com, Kernel Mailing List , linux-mm@kvack.org, Robert Love , Rik van Riel , mingo@redhat.com, Andrew Morton , manfred@colorfullife.com, wli@holomorphy.com List-ID: On February 18, 2002 08:04 pm, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > On February 18, 2002 09:09 am, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > Since copy_page_range would not copy shared page tables, I'm wrong to > > > point there. But __pte_alloc does copy shared page tables (to unshare > > > them), and needs them to be stable while it does so: so locking against > > > swap_out really is required. It also needs locking against read faults, > > > and they against each other: but there I imagine it's just a matter of > > > dropping the write arg to __pte_alloc, going back to pte_alloc again. I'm not sure what you mean here, you're not suggesting we should unshare the page table on read fault are you? -- Daniel -- 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/