From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
To: 'David Gibson' <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, raybry@sgi.com,
'Andy Whitcroft' <apw@shadowen.org>,
'Andrew Morton' <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: RE: hugetlb demand paging patch part [3/3]
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 17:16:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200404151716.i3FHGjF08464@unix-os.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040415072535.GF25560@zax>
In-Reply-To: <200404132325.i3DNPXF21289@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
>>>>> David Gibson wrote on Thursday, April 15, 2004 12:26 AM
>
> > @@ -175,7 +132,6 @@ struct page *follow_huge_addr(struct mm_
> > return NULL;
> > page = pte_page(*ptep);
> > page += ((addr & ~HPAGE_MASK) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> > - get_page(page);
> > return page;
> > }
>
> As far as I can tell, the removal of these get_page()s is also
> unrelated to the demand paging per se. But afaict removing them is
> correct - the corresponding logic in follow_page() for normal pages
> doesn't appear to do a get_page(), nor do all archs do a get_page().
>
> Does that sound right to you?
It's a bug in the code that was never exercised with prefaulting. See
get_user_pages() that short circuits the rest of faulting code with
is_vm_hugetlb_page() test.
> If so, the patch below ought to be safe (and indeed a bugfix) to
> apply now:
Yep, that's correct, I already did x86 and ia64 in one of the three
patches posted. ;-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-15 17:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-13 23:25 hugetlb demand paging patch part [3/3] Chen, Kenneth W
2004-04-15 7:25 ` David Gibson
2004-04-15 17:16 ` Chen, Kenneth W [this message]
2004-04-16 1:40 ` 'David Gibson'
2004-04-16 2:49 ` Chen, Kenneth W
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200404151716.i3FHGjF08464@unix-os.sc.intel.com \
--to=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=apw@shadowen.org \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=raybry@sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox