On Thu, 22 Jun 2006, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> The answer I expect is that update_mmu_cache is essential there in
> do_wp_page (reuse case) and handle_pte_fault, on at least some if
> not all of those arches which implement it. That without those
> lines, they'll fault and refault endlessly, since the "MMU cache"
> has not been updated with the write permission.
Yes a likely scenario.
> But omitted from mprotect, since that's dealing with a batch of
> pages, perhaps none of which will be faulted in the near future:
> a waste of resources to update for all those entries.
So we intentially allow mprotect to be racy?
> But now I wonder, why does do_wp_page reuse case flush_cache_page?
Some arches may have virtual caches?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
