On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 01:26:22PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > From: Michal Hocko <[email protected]> > > If invalidate_range_start is called for !blocking mode then all > callbacks have to guarantee they will no block/sleep. The same obviously > applies to invalidate_range_end because this operation pairs with the > former and they are called from the same context. Make sure this is > appropriately documented. > > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Jerome Glisse <[email protected]> > --- > include/linux/mmu_notifier.h | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/mmu_notifier.h b/include/linux/mmu_notifier.h > index 133ba78820ee..698e371aafe3 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mmu_notifier.h > +++ b/include/linux/mmu_notifier.h > @@ -153,7 +153,9 @@ struct mmu_notifier_ops { > * > * If blockable argument is set to false then the callback cannot > * sleep and has to return with -EAGAIN. 0 should be returned > - * otherwise. > + * otherwise. Please note that if invalidate_range_start approves > + * a non-blocking behavior then the same applies to > + * invalidate_range_end. > * > */ > int (*invalidate_range_start)(struct mmu_notifier *mn, > -- > 2.18.0 >
