From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: tilman@imap.cc, bunk@kernel.org, elendil@planet.nl,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: Unable to continue testing of 2.6.25
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:27:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <p73r6faxxdq.fsf@bingen.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080217.183330.34203930.davem@davemloft.net> (David Miller's message of "Sun\, 17 Feb 2008 18\:33\:30 -0800 \(PST\)")
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> writes:
> From: Tilman Schmidt <tilman@imap.cc>
> Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 20:24:56 +0100
>
>> No, that's not the real problem. Even if the kernel didn't lack
>> any required functionality and it could all be done today without
>> VirtualBox, pulling the rug from underneath it like that leaves
>> all those who are currently relying on it without the ability to
>> continue testing newer kernels until they find the time to redesign
>> their working environment.
>
> No, it is VirtualBox's problem. Nobody outside of the kernel
> should be using that symbol,
> it can only be used for totally
> unsupportable things as far as upstream is concerned.
Creating any uncacheable or write protected mappings in unsupportable?
I suspect you would have a hard time actually justifying this. That's
a relatively common and useful operation in device drivers.
The only special case I would agree with you is doing write-combined
mappings using this which is indeed generally unsupported yet on x86
before the full PAT infrastructure goes in (but
I cannot imagine VirtualBox would use WC for anything)
Most likely if they just want to write protect something
they should either use the new interface or just open code
it using lookup_address() / change ptes / flush tlbs.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-18 12:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-17 9:25 Frans Pop
2008-02-17 13:16 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-02-17 19:24 ` Tilman Schmidt
2008-02-17 19:44 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-02-17 20:38 ` Paul Jackson
2008-02-17 20:51 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-02-19 22:41 ` Frans Pop
2008-02-18 2:33 ` David Miller
2008-02-18 11:40 ` Tilman Schmidt
2008-02-18 12:27 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2008-02-19 21:55 ` Frans Pop
2008-02-19 21:59 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-02-19 22:15 ` Harvey Harrison
2008-02-19 22:19 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-02-19 22:49 ` Frans Pop
2008-02-17 20:46 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-02-18 12:31 ` Andi Kleen
2008-02-18 16:50 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-02-18 17:11 ` Andi Kleen
2008-02-18 17:32 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-02-18 18:40 ` Alan Cox
2008-02-18 18:52 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-02-18 20:15 ` Alan Cox
2008-02-18 18:52 ` Andi Kleen
2008-02-18 18:32 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-02-18 19:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-02-19 9:35 ` Andi Kleen
2008-02-18 18:53 ` Roland Dreier
2008-02-18 19:07 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-02-18 19:18 ` Roland Dreier
2008-02-19 19:42 ` Siddha, Suresh B
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=p73r6faxxdq.fsf@bingen.suse.de \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=elendil@planet.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tilman@imap.cc \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®