[PATCH v5 09/12] arm64: mm: replace TIF_LAZY_MMU with in_lazy_mmu_mode()
David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
david at kernel.org
Thu Dec 4 03:39:10 PST 2025
On 12/4/25 07:52, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> On 24/11/25 6:52 PM, Kevin Brodsky wrote:
>> The generic lazy_mmu layer now tracks whether a task is in lazy MMU
>> mode. As a result we no longer need a TIF flag for that purpose -
>> let's use the new in_lazy_mmu_mode() helper instead.
>>
>> The explicit check for in_interrupt() is no longer necessary either
>> as in_lazy_mmu_mode() always returns false in interrupt context.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky at arm.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 19 +++----------------
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h | 3 +--
>> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> index a7d99dee3dc4..dd7ed653a20d 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> @@ -62,28 +62,16 @@ static inline void emit_pte_barriers(void)
>>
>> static inline void queue_pte_barriers(void)
>> {
>> - unsigned long flags;
>> -
>> - if (in_interrupt()) {
>> - emit_pte_barriers();
>> - return;
>> - }
>> -
>> - flags = read_thread_flags();
>> -
>> - if (flags & BIT(TIF_LAZY_MMU)) {
>> + if (in_lazy_mmu_mode()) {
>> /* Avoid the atomic op if already set. */
>> - if (!(flags & BIT(TIF_LAZY_MMU_PENDING)))
>> + if (!test_thread_flag(TIF_LAZY_MMU_PENDING))
>
> A small nit - will it be better not to use test_thread_flag() here and just
> keep checking flags like earlier to avoid non-related changes. Although not
> a problem TBH.
I'd assume the existing code wanted to avoid fetching the flags two
times? So switching to test_thread_flag() should be fine now.
--
Cheers
David
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list