On 9/7/22 11:01, Yang Shi wrote:
Since general RCU GUP fast was introduced in commit 2667f50e8b81 ("mm:
introduce a general RCU get_user_pages_fast()"), a TLB flush is no longer
sufficient to handle concurrent GUP-fast in all cases, it only handles
traditional IPI-based GUP-fast correctly. On ar
On Wed, Sep 7, 2022 at 2:22 PM Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2022 11:01:43 -0700 Yang Shi wrote:
>
> > Since general RCU GUP fast was introduced in commit 2667f50e8b81 ("mm:
> > introduce a general RCU get_user_pages_fast()"), a TLB flush is no longer
> > sufficient to handle concurrent
On Wed, 7 Sep 2022 11:01:43 -0700 Yang Shi wrote:
> Since general RCU GUP fast was introduced in commit 2667f50e8b81 ("mm:
> introduce a general RCU get_user_pages_fast()"), a TLB flush is no longer
> sufficient to handle concurrent GUP-fast in all cases, it only handles
> traditional IPI-based
Since general RCU GUP fast was introduced in commit 2667f50e8b81 ("mm:
introduce a general RCU get_user_pages_fast()"), a TLB flush is no longer
sufficient to handle concurrent GUP-fast in all cases, it only handles
traditional IPI-based GUP-fast correctly. On architectures that send
an IPI broadc