On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 21:47 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Rohit Seth wrote:
> >
> >
> > It is invalidating any entries (containing same physical address) in both I
> > and D caches. Any dirty lines in D cache are written back to memory before
> > getting invalidate
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 21:52 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Rohit Seth wrote:
>
> >>and
> >>it's only interested when it's executable i.e. "lazy_mmu_prot_update"
> >>is a name concealing some overdesign.
> >
> >
> > You
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 21:39 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Rohit Seth wrote:
> >
> > If a user is requesting kernel to do (for example) write on a page that is
> > already mapped with execute and write permissions then it should be treated
> > as if the user space is
Hi Nick,
-Original Message-
From: Nick Piggin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 11:03 PM
To: Hugh Dickins
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mike Stroyan; Andrew Morton; Luck, Tony;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Fw: [PATCH] ia64: race flushing icac
Hi Hugh,
-Original Message-
From: Hugh Dickins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 10:34 PM
To: Rohit Seth
Cc: Nick Piggin; Mike Stroyan; Andrew Morton; Luck, Tony;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Fw: [PATCH] ia64: race flushing icache in
-Original Message-
From: Hugh Dickins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 10:20 PM
To: Nick Piggin
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mike Stroyan; Andrew Morton; Luck, Tony;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Fw: [PATCH] ia64: race flushing icache in do
do_no_page path
Rohit Seth wrote:
>
>
>> You mean by user space? If so, then it is user space responsibility to
>> do the appropriate operations (like flush icache in this case).
>No, I mean places that set PG_arch_1. flush_dcache_page. This can happen
>for mappe
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 15:18 +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> I presume Mike and Anil are correct, that it needs to be done before
> putting pte into page table, not left until after: but as you've
> guessed, that needs to be done everywhere, not just in the two
> places so far identified.
>
That soun
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 21:55 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> That's the theory. However, I'd still like to know how the arch code can
> make the assertion that icache is known to be at all times other than at
> the time of a fault?
>
Kernel needs to only worry about the updates that it does. So, if
incremented in
NODE_MIN_SIZE granule and uniformly distribute among as many nodes
(called big nodes) as possible.
Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Paul Menage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Rohit Seth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- linux-2.6.20-rc1-m
On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 21:34 +, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Rohit Seth wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 13:24 +, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >> On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, Rohit Seth wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Mel,
> >>>
> >>>
On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 13:24 +, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, Rohit Seth wrote:
>
> > Hi Mel,
> >
> > On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 13:18 +, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, Rohit Seth wrote:
> >>
> >>> This
Hi Mel,
On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 13:18 +, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, Rohit Seth wrote:
>
> > This patch provides a IO hole size in a given address range.
> >
>
> Hi,
>
> This patch reintroduces a function that doubles up what
> absent_page
On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 10:04 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 05:34:47PM -0800, Rohit Seth wrote:
> > Fix the existing numa=fake so that ioholes are appropriately configured.
> > Currently machines that have sizeable IO holes don't work with
> > numa=fa
14 matches
Mail list logo
