From nobody Fri Dec 19 10:23:56 2025 Received: from out-182.mta1.migadu.com (out-182.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98F4D45945 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2024 02:09:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.182 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724810946; cv=none; b=g8pVATQ/n9V8mZSRJ+r6ARx8R0SfS+gUv6Ukc1zu1G7vOVMGAgknstDipyZf1c7K1ttpjlqv7uU5B+qX4WhjDwNhHnocZ/oDliD3mmA10dbs/nOr2pToRqtMm55891N/ukA+G42drrduwY99JTy8FqLhUOYBqsw1XZY+up6pNTs= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724810946; c=relaxed/simple; bh=sUp+zVk3RdAiyV897/ahnmxld48BwN+AwbNzru8HVr8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=UJFuSOvFKTcfx0FNIwDGZ4hK2XdSL0nTef3YbwB18Js9VRGDGMHOt/oW+9NK2ule8fCS7slZ8dKHOkxHuI4jw77xwynCTWJrvdoass+7zPJyAHl6B6Gg+hvHg/Gp3KGp5+BTkyEOOlcs2PblZKPgeyolsW/f5BFxADB6/dIlIS0= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=Xrs5srBi; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.182 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="Xrs5srBi" X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1724810940; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding; bh=CnEoiZhFWRxD12IldvUuHbRSFbA2zADViizcYTgWYrQ=; b=Xrs5srBiHt15m5ou0RQ7KvfLQQdcX0Ay93Ae3RbEFBc1K9hHzmKKOCjjb50UhCf3vUg+GC zdh4dV/Br9IfmyNnI8esCj7Hxc6c5Mpm+cEjDg/0l0/f7NMc67bQgJB6mNXYBVLXT4XAn7 vzN8vKV0eiApTGX+6f0W0Hnf1ntwIlE= From: Yuntao Wang To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org Cc: Dave Hansen , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , Nadav Amit , Yuntao Wang Subject: [PATCH] x86/mm/tlb: Correct the comments in flush_tlb_mm_range() and arch_tlbbatch_flush() Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 10:07:41 +0800 Message-ID: <20240828020741.99869-1-yuntao.wang@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Commit 4c1ba3923e6c ("x86/mm/tlb: Unify flush_tlb_func_local() and flush_tlb_func_remote()") unified flush_tlb_func_local() and flush_tlb_func_remote() into flush_tlb_func(). However, in commit 4ce94eabac16 ("x86/mm/tlb: Flush remote and local TLBs concurrently"), the newly introduced comments still refer to flush_tlb_func_local() when they should use flush_tlb_func(). Correct these comments. Signed-off-by: Yuntao Wang --- arch/x86/mm/tlb.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c index 44ac64f3a047..8b874ec90536 100644 --- a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c +++ b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c @@ -1021,7 +1021,7 @@ void flush_tlb_mm_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigne= d long start, /* * flush_tlb_multi() is not optimized for the common case in which only * a local TLB flush is needed. Optimize this use-case by calling - * flush_tlb_func_local() directly in this case. + * flush_tlb_func() directly in this case. */ if (cpumask_any_but(mm_cpumask(mm), cpu) < nr_cpu_ids) { flush_tlb_multi(mm_cpumask(mm), info); @@ -1254,7 +1254,7 @@ void arch_tlbbatch_flush(struct arch_tlbflush_unmap_b= atch *batch) /* * flush_tlb_multi() is not optimized for the common case in which only * a local TLB flush is needed. Optimize this use-case by calling - * flush_tlb_func_local() directly in this case. + * flush_tlb_func() directly in this case. */ if (cpumask_any_but(&batch->cpumask, cpu) < nr_cpu_ids) { flush_tlb_multi(&batch->cpumask, info); --=20 2.46.0