Displaying 9 results from an estimated 9 matches for "_page_bit_dirty".
2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 4/9] 00mm5 combine flush accessed dirty.patch
...t we want to advertise them so that
+ * we can encompass the flush here.
+ */
#define __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_TEST_AND_CLEAR_DIRTY
-static inline int ptep_test_and_clear_dirty(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
-{
- if (!pte_dirty(*ptep))
- return 0;
- return test_and_clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_DIRTY, &ptep->pte_low);
-}
-
#define __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_TEST_AND_CLEAR_YOUNG
-static inline int ptep_test_and_clear_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
-{
- if (!pte_young(*ptep))
- return 0;
- return test_and_clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_ACCESSED, &ptep->pte_low);
-}...
2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 4/5] Fix bad mmu names.patch
...low; \
- pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (addr), (ptep)); \
+ pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (address), (ptep)); \
flush_tlb_page(vma, address); \
} \
} while (0)
@@ -305,7 +305,7 @@ do { \
__dirty = pte_dirty(*(ptep)); \
if (__dirty) { \
clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_DIRTY, &(ptep)->pte_low); \
- pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (addr), (ptep)); \
+ pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (address), (ptep)); \
flush_tlb_page(vma, address); \
} \
__dirty; \
@@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ do { \
__young = pte_young(*(ptep)); \
if (__yo...
2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 4/5] Fix bad mmu names.patch
...low; \
- pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (addr), (ptep)); \
+ pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (address), (ptep)); \
flush_tlb_page(vma, address); \
} \
} while (0)
@@ -305,7 +305,7 @@ do { \
__dirty = pte_dirty(*(ptep)); \
if (__dirty) { \
clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_DIRTY, &(ptep)->pte_low); \
- pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (addr), (ptep)); \
+ pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (address), (ptep)); \
flush_tlb_page(vma, address); \
} \
__dirty; \
@@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ do { \
__young = pte_young(*(ptep)); \
if (__yo...
2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 9/9] 00mme update pte hook.patch
...if (dirty) { \
(ptep)->pte_low = (entry).pte_low; \
+ pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (addr), (ptep)); \
flush_tlb_page(vma, address); \
} \
} while (0)
@@ -287,6 +305,7 @@ do { \
__dirty = pte_dirty(*(ptep)); \
if (__dirty) { \
clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_DIRTY, &(ptep)->pte_low); \
+ pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (addr), (ptep)); \
flush_tlb_page(vma, address); \
} \
__dirty; \
@@ -299,6 +318,7 @@ do { \
__young = pte_young(*(ptep)); \
if (__young) { \
clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_ACCESSED, &(ptep)...
2007 Apr 18
1
[RFC, PATCH 19/24] i386 Vmi mmu changes
...ich write to page
+ * tables, thus we check for existing definitions first.
+ */
+#ifndef __HAVE_SUBARCH_PTE_WRITE_FUNCTIONS
static inline int ptep_test_and_clear_dirty(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
{
if (!pte_dirty(*ptep))
return 0;
return test_and_clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_DIRTY, &ptep->pte_low);
}
-
+
static inline int ptep_test_and_clear_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
{
if (!pte_young(*ptep))
@@ -281,6 +289,15 @@ static inline void ptep_set_wrprotect(st
clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_RW, &ptep->pte_low);
}
+#define ptep_s...
2007 Apr 18
1
[RFC, PATCH 19/24] i386 Vmi mmu changes
...ich write to page
+ * tables, thus we check for existing definitions first.
+ */
+#ifndef __HAVE_SUBARCH_PTE_WRITE_FUNCTIONS
static inline int ptep_test_and_clear_dirty(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
{
if (!pte_dirty(*ptep))
return 0;
return test_and_clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_DIRTY, &ptep->pte_low);
}
-
+
static inline int ptep_test_and_clear_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
{
if (!pte_young(*ptep))
@@ -281,6 +289,15 @@ static inline void ptep_set_wrprotect(st
clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_RW, &ptep->pte_low);
}
+#define ptep_s...
2007 Apr 18
3
[PATCH] abstract out bits of ldt.c
Chris Wright wrote:
>* Zachary Amsden (zach@vmware.com) wrote:
>
>
>>Does Xen assume page aligned descriptor tables? I assume from this
>>
>>
>
>Yes.
>
>
>
>>patch and snippets I have gathered from others, that is a yes, and other
>>things here imply that DT pages are not shadowed. If so, Xen itself
>>must have live segments
2007 Apr 18
3
[PATCH] abstract out bits of ldt.c
Chris Wright wrote:
>* Zachary Amsden (zach@vmware.com) wrote:
>
>
>>Does Xen assume page aligned descriptor tables? I assume from this
>>
>>
>
>Yes.
>
>
>
>>patch and snippets I have gathered from others, that is a yes, and other
>>things here imply that DT pages are not shadowed. If so, Xen itself
>>must have live segments
2006 Mar 14
12
[RFC] VMI for Xen?
I''m sure everyone has seen the drop of VMI patches for Linux at this
point, but just in case, the link is included below.
I''ve read this version of the VMI spec and have made my way through most
of the patches. While I wasn''t really that impressed with the first
spec wrt Xen, the second version seems to be much more palatable.
Specifically, the code inlining and