[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090604051915.GN1065@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 07:19:15 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"npiggin@...e.de" <npiggin@...e.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [6/16] HWPOISON: Add various poison checks in mm/memory.c
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 12:26:03PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 02:46:38AM +0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > Bail out early when hardware poisoned pages are found in page fault handling.
>
> I suspect this patch is also not absolutely necessary: the poisoned
> page will normally have been isolated already.
It's needed to prevent new pages comming in when there is a parallel
fault while the memory failure handling is in process.
Otherwise the pages could get remapped in that small window.
> > --- linux.orig/mm/memory.c 2009-06-03 19:36:23.000000000 +0200
> > +++ linux/mm/memory.c 2009-06-03 19:36:23.000000000 +0200
> > @@ -2797,6 +2797,9 @@
> > if (unlikely(ret & (VM_FAULT_ERROR | VM_FAULT_NOPAGE)))
> > return ret;
> >
> > + if (unlikely(PageHWPoison(vmf.page)))
> > + return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON;
> > +
>
> Direct return with locked page could lockup someone later.
> Either drop this patch or fix it with this check?
Fair point. Fixed.
Thanks,
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists