| To: | Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [xfs-masters] Re: Interaction between Xen and XFS: stray RW mappings |
| From: | Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 15 Oct 2007 21:28:10 +1000 |
| Cc: | David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Morten Bøgeskov <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=ZfWhGiOaG5IPC/v2tDGjJNIBGiVmHQ703r7cQbGr6Oi0xD46pDJyfnukBOf3v81OnZtinuF+vjeql7z2TWDYfXsPAYF71OgTZZ93F8SnHr4kuiuERpl4YpC+qHWBP3rD47lPZ6yPBDem1nomGAPRltTQrPuz854Kofmu+l1A28c= ; |
| In-reply-to: | <20071015110735.GA11748@one.firstfloor.org> |
| References: | <470FA7C3.90404@goop.org> <200710160056.47458.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20071015110735.GA11748@one.firstfloor.org> |
| Reply-to: | xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | xfs-masters-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | KMail/1.9.5 |
On Monday 15 October 2007 21:07, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 12:56:46AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > > Is this true even if you don't write through those old mappings? > > I think it happened for reads too. It is a little counter intuitive > because in theory the CPU doesn't need to write back non dirty lines, > but in the one case which took so long to debug exactly this happened > somehow. > > At it is undefined for reads and writes in the architecture so > better be safe than sorry. Yes, typo. I meant reads or writes. > And x86 CPUs are out of order and do speculative executation > and that can lead to arbitary memory accesses even if the code > never touches an particular address. > > Newer Intel CPUs have something called self-snoop which was supposed > to handle this; but in some situations it doesn't seem to catch it > either. Fair enough, so we have to have this lazy tlb flush hook for Xen/PAT/etc. I don't think it should be much problem to implement. > > Is DRM or AGP then not also broken with lazy highmem flushing, or > > how do they solve that? > > AGP doesn't allocate highmem pages. Not sure about the DRM code. Hmm, OK. It looks like DRM vmallocs memory (which gives highmem). |
| Previous by Date: | [xfs-masters] Re: Interaction between Xen and XFS: stray RW mappings, Nick Piggin |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [xfs-masters] Re: Interaction between Xen and XFS: stray RW mappings, Andi Kleen |
| Previous by Thread: | [xfs-masters] Re: Interaction between Xen and XFS: stray RW mappings, Andi Kleen |
| Next by Thread: | [xfs-masters] Re: Interaction between Xen and XFS: stray RW mappings, Andi Kleen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |