Re: apparent regressions from TLB range flushing page set

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 22.08.12 at 10:54, Alex Shi <alex.shi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 08/22/2012 03:39 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> 
>>>>> Alex Shi <alex.shi@xxxxxxxxx> 08/22/12 5:24 AM >>>
>>> On 08/20/2012 10:12 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> I was thought you have 'Agreed' for xen part code. :)
>> 
>> I had agreed to it being done the right way, and I had pointed out the
>> problem once. I can't say for sure that I looked at the most recent rev
>> closely enough to spot the issue still being unfixed.
>> 
>>>> For one, while TLB_FLUSH_ALL gets passed as 'end' argument to
>>>> flush_tlb_others(), the Xen code was made to check its 'start'
>>>> parameter.
>>>
>>> Do you mean need the following change? --untested.
>> 
>> Yes. I'd question though whether for that special case it shouldn't be
>> start _and_ end to get passed the special value.
> 
> 
> Actually the special value is already there in old code.
> so, what's your meaning of the question?

I'm saying that I'd rather see

#define flush_tlb_mm(mm)	flush_tlb_mm_range(mm, TLB_FLUSH_ALL, TLB_FLUSH_ALL, 0UL)

Jan

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/