On Tuesday, 2 March 2021 11:41:52 PM AEDT Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > However try_to_protect() scans the PTEs again under the PTL so checking
the
> > mapping of interest actually gets replaced during the rmap walk seems like
a
> > reasonable solution. Thanks for the comments.
>
> It does seem c
On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 07:57:58PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
> The intent was a driver could use HMM or some other mechanism to keep PTEs
> synchronised if required. However I just looked at patch 8 in the series
> again
> and it appears I got this wrong when converting from the old migrati
On Tuesday, 2 March 2021 11:05:59 AM AEDT Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 06:18:29PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
>
> > +/**
> > + * make_device_exclusive_range() - Mark a range for exclusive use by a
device
> > + * @mm: mm_struct of assoicated target process
> > + * @start: sta
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 06:18:29PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
> +/**
> + * make_device_exclusive_range() - Mark a range for exclusive use by a device
> + * @mm: mm_struct of assoicated target process
> + * @start: start of the region to mark for exclusive device access
> + * @end: end address o
> From: Alistair Popple
> Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2021 11:18 PM
> To: linux...@kvack.org; nouv...@lists.freedesktop.org;
> bske...@redhat.com; a...@linux-foundation.org
> Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; dri-
> de...@lists.freedesktop.org; John Hubbard ; Ralph
> Ca
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 06:18:29PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
> Some devices require exclusive write access to shared virtual
> memory (SVM) ranges to perform atomic operations on that memory. This
> requires CPU page tables to be updated to deny access whilst atomic
> operations are occurring.
6 matches
Mail list logo
