On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 03:27:06PM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote: > Rafael Aquini <aqu...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > While backporting 71b3c126e611 ("x86/mm: Add barriers and document > > switch_mm()-vs-flush synchronization") > > we stumbled across a possibly missing barrier at flush_tlb_page(). > > I too noticed it and submitted a similar patch that never got a response [1]. >
As far as I understood Andy's rationale for the original patch you need a full memory barrier there in flush_tlb_page to get that cache-eviction race sorted out. Regards, -- Rafael