[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFwE4K7wmPWKR2SMb9us0LQEoGeLeErrPdB--bSbwf7yzg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 11:46:10 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Aneesh Kumar <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, xfs@....sgi.com,
ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] mm: numa: Slow PTE scan rate if migration failures occur
On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> As a second hack (not to be applied), could we change:
>>
>> #define _PAGE_BIT_PROTNONE _PAGE_BIT_GLOBAL
>>
>> to:
>>
>> #define _PAGE_BIT_PROTNONE (_PAGE_BIT_GLOBAL+1)
>>
>> to double check that the position of the bit does not matter?
>
> Agreed. We should definitely try that.
There's a second reason to do that, actually: the __supported_pte_mask
thing, _and_ the pageattr stuff in __split_large_page() etc play games
with _PAGE_GLOBAL. As does drivers/lguest for some reason.
So looking at this all, there's a lot of room for confusion with _PAGE_GLOBAL.
That kind of confusion would certainly explain the whole "the changes
_look_ like they do the same thing, but don't" - because of silly
semantic conflicts with PROTNONE vs GLOBAL.
Linus
--
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