On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 07:09:15PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/13, Andrei Vagin wrote:
quoted
+static void swap_mm(struct mm_struct *prev_mm, struct mm_struct *target_mm)
+{
+ struct task_struct *tsk = current;
+ struct mm_struct *active_mm;
+
+ task_lock(tsk);
+ /* Hold off tlb flush IPIs while switching mm's */
+ local_irq_disable();
+
+ sync_mm_rss(prev_mm);
+
+ vmacache_flush(tsk);
+
+ active_mm = tsk->active_mm;
+ if (active_mm != target_mm) {
+ mmgrab(target_mm);
+ tsk->active_mm = target_mm;
+ }
+ tsk->mm = target_mm;
+ switch_mm_irqs_off(active_mm, target_mm, tsk);
+ local_irq_enable();
+ task_unlock(tsk);
+#ifdef finish_arch_post_lock_switch
+ finish_arch_post_lock_switch();
+#endif
+
+ if (active_mm != target_mm)
+ mmdrop(active_mm);
+}
I think this should be unified with kthread_use_mm() somehow...
I agree.
And does it really need the "prev_mm" argument? It must be tsk->mm, no?
No, it doesn't. It is leftover of unuse_mm. BTW why do we pass mm to kthread_unuse_mm?
Thanks,
Andrei.