Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
To:     akpm@linux-foundation.org, maobibo@loongson.cn,
        chenhuacai@loongson.cn, songmuchun@bytedance.com, david@redhat.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        loongarch@lists.linux.dev, chris@zankel.net, jcmvbkbc@gmail.com,
        Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/2] mm: use update_mmu_tlb() on the second thread
Date:   Thu, 29 Sep 2022 19:23:17 +0800
Message-Id: <20220929112318.32393-2-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220929112318.32393-1-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
References: <20220929112318.32393-1-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

As message in commit 7df676974359 ("mm/memory.c: Update local TLB
if PTE entry exists") said, we should update local TLB only on the
second thread. So in the do_anonymous_page() here, we should use
update_mmu_tlb() instead of update_mmu_cache() on the second thread.

Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Reviewed-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
---
 mm/memory.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
index 118e5f023597..9e11c783ba0e 100644
--- a/mm/memory.c
+++ b/mm/memory.c
@@ -4122,7 +4122,7 @@ static vm_fault_t do_anonymous_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
 	vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address,
 			&vmf->ptl);
 	if (!pte_none(*vmf->pte)) {
-		update_mmu_cache(vma, vmf->address, vmf->pte);
+		update_mmu_tlb(vma, vmf->address, vmf->pte);
 		goto release;
 	}
 
-- 
2.20.1