On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 04:04:08PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 08:11:06PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 09:08:07PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > Extra credit: IMHO, this clearly deserves to all be in a new mmu_range_notifier.h
> > > > header file, but I know that's extra work. Maybe later as a follow-up patch,
> > > > if anyone has the time.
> > >
> > > The range notifier should get the event too, it would be a waste, i think it is
> > > an oversight here. The release event is fine so NAK to you separate event. Event
> > > is really an helper for notifier i had a set of patch for nouveau to leverage
> > > this i need to resucite them. So no need to split thing, i would just forward
> > > the event ie add event to mmu_range_notifier_ops.invalidate() i failed to catch
> > > that in v1 sorry.
> >
> > I think what you mean is already done?
> >
> > struct mmu_range_notifier_ops {
> > bool (*invalidate)(struct mmu_range_notifier *mrn,
> > const struct mmu_notifier_range *range,
> > unsigned long cur_seq);
>
> Yes it is sorry, i got confuse with mmu_range_notifier and mmu_notifier_range :)
> It is almost a palyndrome structure ;)
Lets change the name then, this is clearly not working. I'll reflow
everything tomorrow
Jason
