Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 18:25:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 18:25:38 -0400 Received: from 2-028.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br ([200.193.160.28]:14574 "EHLO 2-028.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 18:25:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 19:30:11 -0300 (BRT) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@imladris.surriel.com To: Andrew Morton cc: Urban Widmark , Chuck Lever , Daniel Phillips , , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: invalidate_inode_pages in 2.5.32/3 In-Reply-To: <3D811363.70ABB50C@digeo.com> Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1054 Lines: 42 On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Andrew Morton wrote: > Well the lazy invalidation would be OK - defer that to the next > userspace access, I think I have an idea on how to do that, here's some pseudocode: invalidate_page(struct page * page) { SetPageInvalidated(page); rmap_lock(page); for_each_pte(pte, page) { make pte PROT_NONE; flush TLBs for this virtual address; } rmap_unlock(page); } And in the page fault path: if (pte_protection(pte) == PROT_NONE && PageInvalidated(pte_page_pte)) { clear_pte(ptep); page_cache_release(page); mm->rss--; } What do you think, is this simple enough that it would work ? ;) regards, Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ Spamtraps of the month: september@surriel.com trac@trac.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/