[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a494ecba-2fab-f39f-6d6d-9ab43d080988@huawei.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2022 10:01:54 +0800
From: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
To: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@...ux.dev>,
"Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
James Houghton <jthoughton@...gle.com>,
Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] hugetlb: update vma flag check for hugetlb vma lock
On 2022/12/13 7:50, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> The check for whether a hugetlb vma lock exists partially depends on
> the vma's flags. Currently, it checks for either VM_MAYSHARE or
> VM_SHARED. The reason both flags are used is because VM_MAYSHARE was
> previously cleared in hugetlb vmas as they are tore down. This is no
> longer the case, and only the VM_MAYSHARE check is required.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
Nice cleanup. This is also what I planed to do. ;)
Reviewed-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
Thanks,
Miaohe Lin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists