[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGM2reZbYR96_uv-SB=5eL6tt0OSq9yXhtA-B2TGHbRQtfGU6g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 10:17:55 -0400
From: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>
To: mhocko@...nel.org
Cc: Steven Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net, mingo@...nel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Dennis Zhou <dennisszhou@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: allow deferred page init for vmemmap only
> Thanks that helped me to see the problem. On the other hand isn't this a
> bit of an overkill? AFAICS this affects only NEED_PER_CPU_KM which is !SMP
> and DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT makes only very limited sense on UP,
> right?
> Or do we have more such places?
I do not know other places, but my worry is that trap_init() is arch
specific and we cannot guarantee that arches won't do virt to phys in
trap_init() in other places. Therefore, I think a proper fix is simply
allow DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT when it is safe to do virt to phys without
accessing struct pages, which is with SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists