[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131219190846.GA24566@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 20:08:46 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/1] mm: fix the theoretical compound_lock() vs
prep_new_page() race
On 12/16, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> Can you reorder set_page_refcount in your v2?
Please see the patch.
> I wonder if arch_alloc_page needs refcount 1, it sets the page as
> stable on s390.
Obviously I have no idea what set_page_stable() does, but it works
with page_to_phys(), unlikely the content of "struct page" can matter.
And only s390 HAVE_ARCH_ALLOC_PAGE, I added Martin and Heiko.
> the other way around is to move prep_compound_page
> before set_page_refcounted (though I think if we can, keeping the
> refcounted at the very last with a comment is preferable).
Yes, yes, this looks much more natural.
Oleg.
--
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