On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 14:57:12 -0300 Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 05:56:15PM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote: > > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/tlb.h b/include/asm-generic/tlb.h > > index b466172..48c81b9 100644 > > --- a/include/asm-generic/tlb.h > > +++ b/include/asm-generic/tlb.h > > @@ -456,7 +456,7 @@ static inline void tlb_flush_mmu_tlbonly(struct mmu_gather *tlb) > > return; > > > > tlb_flush(tlb); > > - mmu_notifier_invalidate_range(tlb->mm, tlb->start, tlb->end); > > + mmu_notifier_invalidate_secondary_tlbs(tlb->mm, tlb->start, tlb->end); > > __tlb_reset_range(tlb); > > Does this compile? I don't see > "mmu_notifier_invalidate_secondary_tlbs" ? Seems this call gets deleted later in the series. > But I think the approach in this series looks fine, it is so much > cleaner after we remove all the cruft in patch 4, just look at the > diffstat.. I'll push this into -next if it compiles OK for me, but yes, a redo is desirable please.
