[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJd=RBCJL+oPRZMNNmtwSWH6CM1fiUNh=X+Leuk25Lyd3uKB5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 21:24:36 +0800
From: Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hugetlb: do not use vma_hugecache_offset for vma_prio_tree_foreach
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 9:09 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz> wrote:
> On Mon 13-08-12 20:10:41, Hillf Danton wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz> wrote:
>> > From d07b88a70ee1dbcc96502c48cde878931e7deb38 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
>> > Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 15:03:07 +0200
>> > Subject: [PATCH] hugetlb: do not use vma_hugecache_offset for
>> > vma_prio_tree_foreach
>> >
>> > 0c176d5 (mm: hugetlb: fix pgoff computation when unmapping page
>> > from vma) fixed pgoff calculation but it has replaced it by
>> > vma_hugecache_offset which is not approapriate for offsets used for
>> > vma_prio_tree_foreach because that one expects index in page units
>> > rather than in huge_page_shift.
>>
>>
>> What if another case of vma_prio_tree_foreach in try_to_unmap_file
>> is correct?
>
> That one is surely correct (linear_page_index converts the page offset).
But linear_page_index is not used in this patch, why?
> Anyway do you actually have any _real_ objection to the patch?
I will sign ack only after I see your answers to my questions.
Feel free to info me if you are unlikely to answer questions, Michal.
--
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