On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 03:26:46PM -0700, Mark Hairgrove wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 06:15:08PM -0700, Mark Hairgrove wrote:
[...]
> > Ok i see the race you are afraid of and really it is an unlikely one
> > __mutex_unlock_common_slowpath() take a
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 06:15:08PM -0700, Mark Hairgrove wrote:
>
> [...]
> > > There is no race here, the mirror struct will only be freed once as again
> > > the list is a synchronization point. Whoever remove the mirror from the
> > > list is respo
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 06:15:08PM -0700, Mark Hairgrove wrote:
[...]
> > There is no race here, the mirror struct will only be freed once as again
> > the list is a synchronization point. Whoever remove the mirror from the
> > list is responsible to drop the list reference.
> >
> > In the fixed
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> [...]
>
> Like said, just ignore current code it is utterly broken in so many way
> when it comes to lifetime. I screw that part badly when reworking the
> patchset, i was focusing on other part.
>
> I fixed that in my tree, i am waiting for more rev
On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 08:33:12PM -0700, Mark Hairgrove wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2015, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 06:54:29PM -0700, Mark Hairgrove wrote:
> > > Can you clarify how that's different from mmu_notifiers? Those are also
> > > embedded into a driver-owned st
On Tue, 9 Jun 2015, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 06:54:29PM -0700, Mark Hairgrove wrote:
> > Can you clarify how that's different from mmu_notifiers? Those are also
> > embedded into a driver-owned struct.
>
> For HMM you want to be able to kill a mirror from HMM, you might ha
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 06:54:29PM -0700, Mark Hairgrove wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jun 2015, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 12:40:18PM -0700, Mark Hairgrove wrote:
> > > On Thu, 21 May 2015, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > From: Jérôme Glisse
> > > >
> > > > This patch only introduce
On Mon, 8 Jun 2015, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 12:40:18PM -0700, Mark Hairgrove wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 21 May 2015, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > From: Jérôme Glisse
> > >
> > > This patch only introduce core HMM functions for registering a new
> > > mirror and sto
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 12:40:18PM -0700, Mark Hairgrove wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 21 May 2015, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > From: Jérôme Glisse
> >
> > This patch only introduce core HMM functions for registering a new
> > mirror and stopping a mirror as well as HMM device registering and
> > un
On Thu, 21 May 2015, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Jérôme Glisse
>
> This patch only introduce core HMM functions for registering a new
> mirror and stopping a mirror as well as HMM device registering and
> unregistering.
>
> [...]
>
> +/* struct hmm_device_operations - HMM device operation
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:20:05AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> j.gli...@gmail.com writes:
Noted your grammar fixes.
> > diff --git a/mm/Kconfig b/mm/Kconfig
> > index 52ffb86..189e48f 100644
> > --- a/mm/Kconfig
> > +++ b/mm/Kconfig
> > @@ -653,3 +653,18 @@ config DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT
>
j.gli...@gmail.com writes:
> From: Jérôme Glisse
>
> This patch only introduce core HMM functions for registering a new
> mirror and stopping a mirror as well as HMM device registering and
> unregistering.
>
> The lifecycle of HMM object is handled differently then the one of
> mmu_notifier becau
12 matches
Mail list logo
