similar to: how set_pte_at()'s vaddr and ptep args relate

The ptep_establish macro is only used on user-level PTEs, for P->P mapping changes. Since these always happen under protection of the pagetable lock, the strong synchronization of a 64-bit cmpxchg is not needed, in fact, not even a lock prefix needs to be used. We can simply instead clear the P-bit, followed by a normal set. The write ordering is still important to avoid the possibility of

On x86 set_pte_at() is now always falling back to set_pte(). So instead of having this fallback after the paravirt maze just drop the set_pte_at paravirt operation and let set_pte_at() use the set_pte() function directly. Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross at suse.com> --- arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h | 8 +------- arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h | 2 --

Is pte_offset_map allowed to happen within lazy mmu? I presume not, because you definitely don't want the mapping pte update to be deferred. Or, more specifically, is kunmap_atomic ever allowed within lazy mmu? I'm looking at kpte_clear_flush; I've already got a patch which turns this into a pv_op, along with a Xen implementation. But I think its probably an excess pv_op for a

Is pte_offset_map allowed to happen within lazy mmu? I presume not, because you definitely don't want the mapping pte update to be deferred. Or, more specifically, is kunmap_atomic ever allowed within lazy mmu? I'm looking at kpte_clear_flush; I've already got a patch which turns this into a pv_op, along with a Xen implementation. But I think its probably an excess pv_op for a

A lot of cleanup after removal of 32-bit Xen PV guest support in paravirt code. Changes in V4: - dropped patches 1-3, as already committed - addressed comments to V3 - added new patches 5+6 Changes in V3: - addressed comments to V2 - split patch 1 into 2 patches - new patches 3 and 7 Changes in V2: - rebase to 5.8 kernel - addressed comments to V1 - new patches 3 and 4 Juergen Gross (6):

On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 04:00:39PM -0700, zach@vmware.com wrote: > Make the generic version of ptep_set_wrprotect a macro. This is good for > code uniformity, and fixes the build for architectures which include pgtable.h > through headers into assembly code, but do not define a ptep_set_wrprotect > function. This against the kernel coding style. In fact, we are usually doing

On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 04:00:39PM -0700, zach@vmware.com wrote: > Make the generic version of ptep_set_wrprotect a macro. This is good for > code uniformity, and fixes the build for architectures which include pgtable.h > through headers into assembly code, but do not define a ptep_set_wrprotect > function. This against the kernel coding style. In fact, we are usually doing

Hi Andi, This series of patches updates paravirt_ops in various ways. Some of the changes are plain cleanups and improvements, and some add some interfaces necessary for Xen. The brief overview: add-MAINTAINERS.patch - obvious remove-CONFIG_DEBUG_PARAVIRT.patch - no longer needed paravirt-nop.patch - mark nop operations consistently paravirt-pte-accessors.patch - operations to pack/unpack

Hi Andi, This series of patches updates paravirt_ops in various ways. Some of the changes are plain cleanups and improvements, and some add some interfaces necessary for Xen. The brief overview: add-MAINTAINERS.patch - obvious remove-CONFIG_DEBUG_PARAVIRT.patch - no longer needed paravirt-nop.patch - mark nop operations consistently paravirt-pte-accessors.patch - operations to pack/unpack

Hi Andi, Here's a repost of the paravirt_ops update series I posted the other day. Since then, I found a few potential bugs with patching clobbering, cleaned up and documented paravirt.h and the patching machinery. Overview: add-MAINTAINERS.patch obvious remove-CONFIG_DEBUG_PARAVIRT.patch No longer meaningful or needed. paravirt-nop.patch Clean up nop paravirt_ops functions, mainly to

Hi Andi, Here's a repost of the paravirt_ops update series I posted the other day. Since then, I found a few potential bugs with patching clobbering, cleaned up and documented paravirt.h and the patching machinery. Overview: add-MAINTAINERS.patch obvious remove-CONFIG_DEBUG_PARAVIRT.patch No longer meaningful or needed. paravirt-nop.patch Clean up nop paravirt_ops functions, mainly to

MMU code movement. Unfortunately, this one is a little bit more complicated than the rest. We have to override the default accessors that directly write to page table entries. Because of the 2/3-level PAE split in Linux, this turned out to be really ugly at first, but by allowing the sub-arch layer to override the definitions and keeping the native definitions in place, the code becomes much

MMU code movement. Unfortunately, this one is a little bit more complicated than the rest. We have to override the default accessors that directly write to page table entries. Because of the 2/3-level PAE split in Linux, this turned out to be really ugly at first, but by allowing the sub-arch layer to override the definitions and keeping the native definitions in place, the code becomes much

Hi all, [ Change since last post: change name to ptep_modify_prot_, on the grounds that it isn't really a general pte-modification interface. ] This little series adds a new transaction-like abstraction for doing RMW updates to a pte, hooks it into paravirt_ops, and then makes use of it in Xen. The basic problem is that mprotect is very slow under Xen (up to 50x slower than native),

Hi all, [ Change since last post: change name to ptep_modify_prot_, on the grounds that it isn't really a general pte-modification interface. ] This little series adds a new transaction-like abstraction for doing RMW updates to a pte, hooks it into paravirt_ops, and then makes use of it in Xen. The basic problem is that mprotect is very slow under Xen (up to 50x slower than native),

Hi all, [ Change since last post: change name to ptep_modify_prot_, on the grounds that it isn't really a general pte-modification interface. ] This little series adds a new transaction-like abstraction for doing RMW updates to a pte, hooks it into paravirt_ops, and then makes use of it in Xen. The basic problem is that mprotect is very slow under Xen (up to 50x slower than native),

Hi all, This little series adds a new transaction-like abstraction for doing RMW updates to a pte, hooks it into paravirt_ops, and then makes use of it in Xen. The basic problem is that mprotect is very slow under Xen (up to 50x slower than native), primarily because of the ptent = ptep_get_and_clear(mm, addr, pte); ptent = pte_modify(ptent, newprot); /* ... */ set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte,

Hi all, This little series adds a new transaction-like abstraction for doing RMW updates to a pte, hooks it into paravirt_ops, and then makes use of it in Xen. The basic problem is that mprotect is very slow under Xen (up to 50x slower than native), primarily because of the ptent = ptep_get_and_clear(mm, addr, pte); ptent = pte_modify(ptent, newprot); /* ... */ set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte,

Hi all, This little series adds a new transaction-like abstraction for doing RMW updates to a pte, hooks it into paravirt_ops, and then makes use of it in Xen. The basic problem is that mprotect is very slow under Xen (up to 50x slower than native), primarily because of the ptent = ptep_get_and_clear(mm, addr, pte); ptent = pte_modify(ptent, newprot); /* ... */ set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte,

With removal of lguest some of the paravirt functions are no longer needed. Remove them. Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross at suse.com> --- arch/x86/include/asm/desc.h | 3 +-- arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h | 37 ----------------------------------- arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h | 9 --------- arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h | 27