Hi Mike, On 05/01/2017 07:43 AM, Mike Rapoport wrote: > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Thanks. Applied. One question below. > --- > man2/userfaultfd.2 | 12 ++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/man2/userfaultfd.2 b/man2/userfaultfd.2 > index 8b89162..f177bba 100644 > --- a/man2/userfaultfd.2 > +++ b/man2/userfaultfd.2 > @@ -112,6 +112,18 @@ created for the child process, > which allows userfaultfd monitor to perform user-space paging > for the child process. > > +Unlike page faults which have to be synchronous and require > +explicit or implicit wakeup, > +all other events are delivered asynchronously and > +the non-cooperative process resumes execution as > +soon as manager executes > +.BR read(2). > +The userfaultfd manager should carefully synchronize calls > +to UFFDIO_COPY with the events processing. > + > +The current asynchronous model of the event delivery is optimal for > +single threaded non-cooperative userfaultfd manager implementations. The preceding paragraph feels incomplete. It seems like you want to make a point with that last sentence, but the point is not explicit. What's missing? > + > .\" FIXME elaborate about non-cooperating mode, describe its limitations > .\" for kernels before 4.11, features added in 4.11 > .\" and limitations remaining in 4.11 > Cheers, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
