From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752581AbZHXN4P (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 09:56:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752540AbZHXN4O (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 09:56:14 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f217.google.com ([209.85.220.217]:44138 "EHLO mail-fx0-f217.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752499AbZHXN4N (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 09:56:13 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type; b=RWPMtQaSQsqEHLPlr3w4mW8rFzUWlCI1m66gm3YhRg266mwp4bc+BQCDFJzcaYMPid +qNb8BMJAIqfODQG8oke6CGUtamgzQ6ca87RAnKnlAjrvhwkXr9l9jAB55WFAXuADSG4 vpTpER5C7icS7Q1PI+rAtiOA3Sa30CYSDDO9g= Message-ID: <4A929BF5.2050105@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 15:56:05 +0200 From: Stefan Huber Reply-To: shuber2@gmail.com User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090804) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hugh Dickins CC: Andrew Morton , Peter Meerwald , James Morris , William Irwin , Mel Gorman , Ravikiran G Thirumalai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fix hugetlb bug due to user_shm_unlock call (fwd) References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigE64C7769F176B869D162D009" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigE64C7769F176B869D162D009 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > However, though I can well believe that your patch works well for you, > I don't think it's general enough: there is no guarantee that the tests= > in can_do_hugetlb_shm() will give the same answer to the user who ends > up calling shm_destroy() as it did once upon a time to the user who > called hugetlb_file_setup(). >=20 > So, please could you try this alternative patch below, to see if it > passes your testing too, and let us know the result? I'm sure we'd > like to get a fix into 2.6.31, and into 2.6.30-stable. Yes, your observation is right and your modified patch works good for me. So long Stefan --------------enigE64C7769F176B869D162D009 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEAREIAAYFAkqSm/oACgkQluL3b44/h0ofQwCeJ6vUjbAZZc13APFOUMZNOTbI eqYAoKhtPiHynuffJAKHZFYjEDRgEpTQ =mRoT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigE64C7769F176B869D162D009--