[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130108180302.GA27871@shutemov.name>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 20:03:02 +0200
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: oops in copy_page_rep()
On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 06:49:51PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Hi Kirill,
>
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 07:30:58PM +0200, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > Merged patch is obviously broken: huge_pmd_set_accessed() can be called
> > only if the pmd is under splitting.
>
> Of course I assume you meant "only if the pmd is not under splitting".
The broken merged patch has this:
+ if (dirty && !pmd_write(orig_pmd) &&
!pmd_trans_splitting(orig_pmd)) {
[...]
+ } else {
+ huge_pmd_set_accessed(mm, vma, address, pmd,
+ orig_pmd, dirty);
}
> But no, setting a bitflag like the young bit or clearing or setting
> the numa bit won't screw with split_huge_page and it's safe even if
> the pmd is under splitting.
Okay. Thanks for clarification for me.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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