Re: testing pmdval/pteval page presence bit

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Pekka Paalanen
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 11:08 am

(Oliver and David, I added you to CC, since I recall you were planning
for user space tracing in mmiotrace.)

On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:42:56 -0800
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:


Okay, will look into those, but it also means I need to record which
one I am dealing with.


This is good to know. So far these are kernel mappings, as they are all
created by ioremap*(), but there are plans to extend mmiotrace to
trace IO-mappings accessed from user space. Do you have hints for that?

OTOH, we are always dealing with PCI IO-mem-mappings, so would those ever
be not present, excluding the mmiotrace case?

Well, Stuart already found out that the kernel ioremap*()'ed pages might
not really be present, there are some fixes coming up to mmiotrace to
cope with that. The plan is to restore the state of the pte like it was
before mmiotrace cleared the _PAGE_PRESENT flag, and if the same
instruction and address faults again, fall through to the normal page
fault handling. How can/will this fail? And if it is a user page?

Oh, we are on x86/x86_64 only.


Thanks.

-- 
Pekka Paalanen
http://www.iki.fi/pq/
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
testing pmdval/pteval page presence bit, Pekka Paalanen, (Mon Feb 9, 12:58 pm)
Re: testing pmdval/pteval page presence bit, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Tue Feb 10, 3:42 pm)
Re: testing pmdval/pteval page presence bit, Pekka Paalanen, (Wed Feb 11, 11:08 am)
Re: testing pmdval/pteval page presence bit, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Wed Feb 11, 11:51 am)