[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 14:27:12 -0700
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Jia He <justin.he@....com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@...are.com>,
Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: fix double page fault on arm64 if PTE_AF is
cleared
On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 09:57:47PM +0800, Jia He wrote:
> + if (!pte_young(vmf->orig_pte)) {
> + entry = pte_mkyoung(vmf->orig_pte);
> + if (ptep_set_access_flags(vmf->vma, vmf->address,
> + vmf->pte, entry, 0))
> + update_mmu_cache(vmf->vma, vmf->address,
> + vmf->pte);
> + }
> +
Oh, btw, why call update_mmu_cache() here? All you've done is changed
the 'accessed' bit. What is any architecture supposed to do in response
to this?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists