[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1351260464.16863.80.camel@twins>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:07:44 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] numa, mm: drop redundant check in
do_huge_pmd_numa_page()
On Fri, 2012-10-26 at 16:57 +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > Yes, this code will catch it:
> > >
> > > /* if an huge pmd materialized from under us just retry later */
> > > if (unlikely(pmd_trans_huge(*pmd)))
> > > return 0;
> > >
> > > If the pmd is under splitting it's still a pmd_trans_huge().
> >
> > OK, so then we simply keep taking the same fault until the split is
> > complete? Wouldn't it be better to wait for it instead of spin on
> > faults?
>
> IIUC, on next fault we will wait split the page in fallow_page().
What follow_page()?, a regular hardware page-fault will not call
follow_page() afaict, we do a down_read(), find_vma() and call
handle_mm_fault() -- with a lot of error and corner case checking in
between.
--
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