[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f0d1ebae-f518-9761-f39c-5c1b52f3eebf@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2022 20:22:46 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
Peter Feiner <pfeiner@...gle.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] mm/hugetlb: fix hugetlb not supporting
write-notify
On 05.08.22 20:14, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 05, 2022 at 01:03:28PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
>> index 61e6135c54ef..462a6b0344ac 100644
>> --- a/mm/mmap.c
>> +++ b/mm/mmap.c
>> @@ -1683,6 +1683,13 @@ int vma_wants_writenotify(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pgprot_t vm_page_prot)
>> if ((vm_flags & (VM_WRITE|VM_SHARED)) != ((VM_WRITE|VM_SHARED)))
>> return 0;
>>
>> + /*
>> + * Hugetlb does not require/support writenotify; especially, it does not
>> + * support softdirty tracking.
>> + */
>> + if (is_vm_hugetlb_page(vma))
>> + return 0;
>
> I'm kind of confused here.. you seems to be fixing up soft-dirty for
> hugetlb but here it's explicitly forbidden.
>
> Could you explain a bit more on why this patch is needed if (assume
> there'll be a working) patch 2 being provided?
I want something simple to backport. And even with patch #2 in place, as
long as we don't support softdirty tracking, it doesn't make sense to
enable it here as of now.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists