Re: [PATCH 2/7] mmu_notifier: keep track of active invalidation ranges v2

2015-01-05 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 08:46:42AM +, Haggai Eran wrote: > > On Dec 26, 2014 9:20 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 10:29:44AM +0200, Haggai Eran wrote: > > > On 22/12/2014 18:48, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > static inline void mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(

Re: [PATCH 2/7] mmu_notifier: keep track of active invalidation ranges v2

2014-12-25 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 10:29:44AM +0200, Haggai Eran wrote: > On 22/12/2014 18:48, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote: > > static inline void mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(struct mm_struct > > *mm, > > - unsigned long start, > > -

Re: [PATCH 2/7] mmu_notifier: keep track of active invalidation ranges v2

2014-12-25 Thread Haggai Eran
On 22/12/2014 18:48, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote: > static inline void mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(struct mm_struct *mm, > -unsigned long start, > -unsigned long end, > -

[PATCH 2/7] mmu_notifier: keep track of active invalidation ranges v2

2014-12-22 Thread j . glisse
From: Jérôme Glisse The mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start() and mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end() can be considered as forming an "atomic" section for the cpu page table update point of view. Between this two function the cpu page table content is unreliable for the address range being inva