[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1400704507.18128.23.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 14:35:07 -0600
From: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@...el.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, willy@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 07/22] Replace the XIP page fault handler with the
DAX page fault handler
On Sun, 2014-03-23 at 15:08 -0400, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
:
> +static int do_dax_fault(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct vm_fault *vmf,
> + get_block_t get_block)
> +{
:
> + error = dax_get_pfn(inode, &bh, &pfn);
> + if (error > 0)
> + error = vm_insert_mixed(vma, vaddr, pfn);
> + mutex_unlock(&mapping->i_mmap_mutex);
> +
> + if (page) {
> + delete_from_page_cache(page);
> + unmap_mapping_range(mapping, vmf->pgoff << PAGE_SHIFT,
> + PAGE_CACHE_SIZE, 0);
> + unlock_page(page);
> + page_cache_release(page);
Hi Matthew,
I am seeing a problem in this code path, where it deletes a page cache
page mapped to a hole. Sometimes, page->_mapcount is 0, not -1, which
leads __delete_from_page_cache(), called from delete_from_page_cache(),
to hit the following BUG_ON.
BUG_ON(page_mapped(page))
I suppose such page has a shared mapping. Does this code need to take
care of replacing shared mappings in such case?
Thanks,
-Toshi
--
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