On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 19:20 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > As long as the races to avoid are between map/unmap vs. access, yes, it > > -should- be fine, and we used to not do demand faulting on kernel space > > (but for how long ?). I'm wondering why we don't just stick a ptl in > > there or is there a good reason why we can't ? > > We can - but we usually prefer to avoid unnecessary locking. > An arch function which locks init_mm.page_table_lock on powerpc, > but does nothing on others?
That still means gratuitous differences between how the normal and kernel page tables are handled. Maybe that's not worth bothering ... Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
