[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <BBCFE41B-9ABB-49C1-BDC7-EAF07964A6FF@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2022 14:00:36 -0700
From: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/hugetlb: Fix race condition of uffd missing/minor
handling
On Oct 3, 2022, at 8:56 AM, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> + */
> + if (hugetlb_pte_stable(h, mm, ptep, old_pte))
> + ret = hugetlb_handle_userfault(
> + vma, mapping, idx, flags, haddr,
> + address, VM_UFFD_MISSING);
> + else
> + /* Retry the fault */
> + ret = 0;
Might be unrelated, but at least for the sake of consistency if not
potential GUP issues, don’t you want to return VM_FAULT_RETRY ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists