[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YtA6GcRwP7iiJScG@xz-m1.local>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 11:45:29 -0400
From: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
Cc: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: avoid corrupting page->mapping in
hugetlb_mcopy_atomic_pte
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 06:09:49PM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
> As discussed in another thread, we might call page_dup_file_rmap for newly
> allocated page (regardless of this patch). So should we come up a seperate
> patch to call page_add_file_rmap here instead?
Hmm, why we need page_add_file_rmap() even if a new page allocated? Say,
we're at least also using page_dup_file_rmap() in hugetlb_no_page().
I see majorly two things extra there: memcg accounts on NR_FILE_MAPPED, and
mlock. But I assume both of them will not apply to hugetlb pages?
--
Peter Xu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists