On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 12:47:46PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> From: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> CPU page table update can happens for many reasons, not only as a result
> of a syscall (munmap(), mprotect(), mremap(), madvise(), ...) but also
> as a result of kernel activities (memory compression, reclaim, migration,
> ...).
>
> Users of mmu notifier API track changes to the CPU page table and take
> specific action for them. While current API only provide range of virtual
> address affected by the change, not why the changes is happening
>
> This patch is just passing down the new informations by adding it to the
> mmu_notifier_range structure.
>
> Changes since v1:
> - Initialize flags field from mmu_notifier_range_init() arguments
>
> Signed-off-by: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Ross Zwisler <zwisler@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/mmu_notifier.h | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/mmu_notifier.h b/include/linux/mmu_notifier.h
> index 62f94cd85455..0379956fff23 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mmu_notifier.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mmu_notifier.h
> @@ -58,10 +58,12 @@ struct mmu_notifier_mm {
> #define MMU_NOTIFIER_RANGE_BLOCKABLE (1 << 0)
>
> struct mmu_notifier_range {
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> struct mm_struct *mm;
> unsigned long start;
> unsigned long end;
> unsigned flags;
> + enum mmu_notifier_event event;
> };
>
> struct mmu_notifier_ops {
> @@ -363,10 +365,12 @@ static inline void mmu_notifier_range_init(struct mmu_notifier_range *range,
> unsigned long start,
> unsigned long end)
> {
> + range->vma = vma;
> + range->event = event;
> range->mm = mm;
> range->start = start;
> range->end = end;
> - range->flags = 0;
> + range->flags = flags;
Which of the "user patch sets" uses the new flags?
I'm not seeing that user yet. In general I don't see anything wrong with the
series and I like the idea of telling drivers why the invalidate has fired.
But is the flags a future feature?
For the series:
Reviewed-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx>
Ira
> }
>
> #define ptep_clear_flush_young_notify(__vma, __address, __ptep) \
> --
> 2.20.1
>
