Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760556AbYAYVT7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jan 2008 16:19:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756085AbYAYVTu (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jan 2008 16:19:50 -0500 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:52370 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755940AbYAYVTt (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jan 2008 16:19:49 -0500 Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] [RFC] MMU Notifiers V1 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Reply-To: benh@kernel.crashing.org To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Christoph Lameter , Robin Holt , Avi Kivity , Izik Eidus , Nick Piggin , kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Peter Zijlstra , steiner@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, daniel.blueman@quadrics.com, Hugh Dickins In-Reply-To: <20080125114229.GA7454@v2.random> References: <20080125055606.102986685@sgi.com> <20080125114229.GA7454@v2.random> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 08:18:41 +1100 Message-Id: <1201295921.6815.150.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1494 Lines: 35 On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 12:42 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 09:56:06PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > Andrea's mmu_notifier #4 -> RFC V1 > > > > - Merge subsystem rmap based with Linux rmap based approach > > - Move Linux rmap based notifiers out of macro > > - Try to account for what locks are held while the notifiers are > > called. > > - Develop a patch sequence that separates out the different types of > > hooks so that it is easier to review their use. > > - Avoid adding #include to linux/mm_types.h > > - Integrate RCU logic suggested by Peter. > > I'm glad you're converging on something a bit saner and much much > closer to my code, plus perfectly usable by KVM optimal rmap design > too. It would have preferred if you would have sent me patches like > Peter did for review and merging etc... that would have made review > especially easier. Anyway I'm used to that on lkml so it's ok, I just > need this patch to be included in mainline, everything else is > irrelevant to me. Also, wouldn't there be a problem with something trying to use that interface to keep in sync a secondary device MMU such as the DRM or other accelerators, which might need virtual address based invalidation ? Ben. -- 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/