> Please consider the second issue I mentioned about the "itc": > Making sure that an external purge request will not be missed by our new > translation. See also on page 3:127: While this is true, I'm still not seeing how this can cause a problem (but I didn't see the problem that Christoph just found that started this whole thread in six years of looking at this code, so I'm willing to accept that I may be missing something). If another processor has a purge floating out there on the bus at this time, it would be because that other processor was making some change to this mapping. In which case it would have executed: *pte = new_value ptc Are you saying that these events may become visible to the processor that is executing the dirty_bit handler in either order, so that you are worried we'll see the old *pte value when we do the load, but miss the purge because we didn't wait for the itc.d to complete before we did the load? -Tony - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
![]() |