> +#define mmu_notifier(function, mm, args...) \ ... > + if (__mn->ops->function) \ > + __mn->ops->function(__mn, \ > + mm, \ > + args); \
__mn->ops->function(__mn, mm, args); \ I realize it is a minor nit, but since we put the continuation in column 81 in the next define, can we do the same here and make this more readable? > + rcu_read_unlock(); \ ... > +#define mmu_rmap_notifier(function, args...) > \ > + do { > \ > + struct mmu_rmap_notifier *__mrn; > \ > + struct hlist_node *__n; > \ > + > \ > +void mmu_notifier_release(struct mm_struct *mm) > +{ > + struct mmu_notifier *mn; > + struct hlist_node *n; > + > + if (unlikely(!hlist_empty(&mm->mmu_notifier.head))) { > + rcu_read_lock(); > + hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(mn, n, > + &mm->mmu_notifier.head, hlist) { > + if (mn->ops->release) > + mn->ops->release(mn, mm); > + hlist_del(&mn->hlist); I think the hlist_del needs to be before the function callout so we can free the structure without a use-after-free issue. hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(mn, n, &mm->mmu_notifier.head, hlist) { hlist_del_rcu(&mn->hlist); if (mn->ops->release) mn->ops->release(mn, mm); > +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(mmu_notifier_list_lock); Remove > + > +void mmu_notifier_register(struct mmu_notifier *mn, struct mm_struct *mm) > +{ > + spin_lock(&mmu_notifier_list_lock); Shouldn't this really be protected by the down_write(mmap_sem)? Maybe: BUG_ON(!rwsem_is_write_locked(&mm->mmap_sem)); > + hlist_add_head(&mn->hlist, &mm->mmu_notifier.head); hlist_add_head_rcu(&mn->hlist, &mm->mmu_notifier.head); > + spin_unlock(&mmu_notifier_list_lock); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mmu_notifier_register); > + > +void mmu_notifier_unregister(struct mmu_notifier *mn, struct mm_struct *mm) > +{ > + spin_lock(&mmu_notifier_list_lock); > + hlist_del(&mn->hlist); hlist_del_rcu? Ditto on the lock. > + spin_unlock(&mmu_notifier_list_lock); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mmu_notifier_unregister); > + > +HLIST_HEAD(mmu_rmap_notifier_list); static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(mmu_rmap_notifier_list_lock); > + > +void mmu_rmap_notifier_register(struct mmu_rmap_notifier *mrn) > +{ > + spin_lock(&mmu_notifier_list_lock); > + hlist_add_head_rcu(&mrn->hlist, &mmu_rmap_notifier_list); > + spin_unlock(&mmu_notifier_list_lock); spin_lock(&mmu_rmap_notifier_list_lock); hlist_add_head_rcu(&mrn->hlist, &mmu_rmap_notifier_list); spin_unlock(&mmu_rmap_notifier_list_lock); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(mmu_rmap_notifier_register); > + > +void mmu_rmap_notifier_unregister(struct mmu_rmap_notifier *mrn) > +{ > + spin_lock(&mmu_notifier_list_lock); > + hlist_del_rcu(&mrn->hlist); > + spin_unlock(&mmu_notifier_list_lock); spin_lock(&mmu_rmap_notifier_list_lock); hlist_del_rcu(&mrn->hlist); spin_unlock(&mmu_rmap_notifier_list_lock); > @@ -2043,6 +2044,7 @@ void exit_mmap(struct mm_struct *mm) > vm_unacct_memory(nr_accounted); > free_pgtables(&tlb, vma, FIRST_USER_ADDRESS, 0); > tlb_finish_mmu(tlb, 0, end); > + mmu_notifier_release(mm); Can we consider moving this notifier or introducing an additional notifier in the release or a flag to this one indicating early/late. The GRU that Jack is concerned with would benefit from the early in that it could just invalidate the GRU context and immediately all GRU TLB entries are invalid. I believe Jack would like to also be able to remove his entry from the mmu_notifier list in an effort to avoid the page and range callouts. XPMEM, would also benefit from a call early. We could make all the segments as being torn down and start the recalls. We already have this code in and working (have since it was first written 6 years ago). In this case, all segments are torn down with a single message to each of the importing partitions. In contrast, the teardown code which would happen now would be one set of messages for each vma. Thanks, Robin ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel