Re: Dirty/Access bits vs. page content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 04/24/2014 04:46 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> IOW, how about the attached patch that entirely replaces my previous
> two patches. DaveH - does this fix your test-case, while _not_
> introducing any new BUG_ON() triggers?
> 
> I didn't test the patch, maybe I did something stupid. It compiles for
> me, but it only works for the HAVE_GENERIC_MMU_GATHER case, but
> introducing tlb_flush_mmu_tlbonly() and tlb_flush_mmu_free() into the
> non-generic cases should be trivial, since they really are just that
> old "tlb_flush_mmu()" function split up (the tlb_flush_mmu() function
> remains available for other non-forced flush users)
> 
> So assuming this does work for DaveH, then the arm/ia64/um/whatever
> people would need to do those trivial transforms too, but it really
> shouldn't be too painful.

It looks happy on both my debugging kernel (which was triggering it
before) and the one without lockdep and all the things that normally
slow it down and change timing.


--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]