Re: [PATCH v3 03/13] powerpc/mm: implement arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode()
From: David Hildenbrand <hidden>
Date: 2025-10-23 19:36:58
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, linux-mm, lkml, sparclinux, xen-devel
On 15.10.25 10:27, Kevin Brodsky wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Upcoming changes to the lazy_mmu API will cause arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode() to be called when leaving a nested lazy_mmu section. Move the relevant logic from arch_leave_lazy_mmu_mode() to arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode() and have the former call the latter. Signed-off-by: Kevin Brodsky <redacted> --- .../powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/tlbflush-hash.h | 15 +++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/tlbflush-hash.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/tlbflush-hash.h index 146287d9580f..7704dbe8e88d 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/tlbflush-hash.h +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/tlbflush-hash.h@@ -41,6 +41,16 @@ static inline void arch_enter_lazy_mmu_mode(void) batch->active = 1; } +static inline void arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode(void) +{ + struct ppc64_tlb_batch *batch; + + batch = this_cpu_ptr(&ppc64_tlb_batch);
The downside is the double this_cpu_ptr() now on the arch_leave_lazy_mmu_mode() path. You could just have a helper function that is called by either or just ... leave arch_leave_lazy_mmu_mode() alone and just replicate the two statements here in arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode(). I would do just that :) -- Cheers David / dhildenb