On Nov 15, 2022, at 5:50 PM, Yicong Yang <yangyicong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > !! External Email > > On 2022/11/16 7:38, Nadav Amit wrote: >> On Nov 14, 2022, at 7:14 PM, Yicong Yang <yangyicong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h >>> index 8a497d902c16..5bd78ae55cd4 100644 >>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h >>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h >>> @@ -264,7 +264,8 @@ static inline u64 inc_mm_tlb_gen(struct mm_struct *mm) >>> } >>> >>> static inline void arch_tlbbatch_add_mm(struct arch_tlbflush_unmap_batch *batch, >>> - struct mm_struct *mm) >>> + struct mm_struct *mm, >>> + unsigned long uaddr) >> >> Logic-wise it looks fine. I notice the “v6", and it should not be blocking, >> but I would note that the name "arch_tlbbatch_add_mm()” does not make much >> sense once the function also takes an address. > > ok the add_mm should still apply to x86 since the address is not used, but not for arm64. > >> It could’ve been something like arch_set_tlb_ubc_flush_pending() but that’s >> too long. I’m not very good with naming, but the current name is not great. > > What about arch_tlbbatch_add_pending()? Considering the x86 is pending the flush operation > while arm64 is pending the sychronization operation, arch_tlbbatch_add_pending() should > make sense to both. Sounds reasonable. Thanks.
