[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <516EAF31.8000107@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 07:18:25 -0700
From: Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>
To: zhang.yi20@....com.cn
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] futex: bugfix for futex-key conflict when futex use hugepage
On 04/17/2013 02:55 AM, zhang.yi20@....com.cn wrote:
> Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com> wrote on 2013/04/17 01:57:10:
>
>> Again, a functional testcase in futextest would be a good idea. This
>> helps validate the patch and also can be used to identify regressions in
>> the future.
>
> I will post the testcase code later.
>
>>
>> What is the max value of comp_idx? Are we at risk of truncating it?
>> Looks like not really from my initial look.
>>
>> This also needs a comment in futex.h describing the usage of the offset
>> field in union futex_key as well as above get_futex_key describing the
>> key for shared mappings.
>>
>>
>
> As far as I know , the max size of one hugepage is 1 GBytes for x86 cpu.
> Can some other cpus support greater hugepage even more than 4 GBytes? If
> so, we can change the type of 'offset' from int to long to avoid
> truncating.
I discussed this with Dave Hansen, on CC, and he thought we needed 9
bits, so even on x86 32b we should be covered.
--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel
--
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