From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: William Lee Irwin III Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 08:55:31 +0000 Subject: Re: Hugetlb demanding paging for -mm tree Message-Id: <20040810085531.GI11200@holomorphy.com> List-Id: References: <01EF044AAEE12F4BAAD955CB750649430200560D@scsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <01EF044AAEE12F4BAAD955CB750649430200560D@scsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Seth, Rohit" Cc: "Chen, Kenneth W" , Hirokazu Takahashi , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org William Lee Irwin III <> wrote on Monday, August 09, 2004 11:59 AM: >> As things stand in mainline, it's not an obvious issue. Ken appears to >> be calling it for hugetlb in the ZFOD fault handling patches, which >> have the issue that it may behave badly in several respects when >> acting on large pages. The cache coherency bits in update_mmu_fault() >> are necessary in general, but mainline omits them. It should only >> result in intermittent failures on machines with sufficiently >> incoherent caches. On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 01:52:02AM -0700, Seth, Rohit wrote: > Will the flush_dcache_page for hugepages even on incoherent caches be > not enough. And that flush_dcache_page should be done in alloc_hugepage > after clearing the page(or change the clear_highpage to > clear_user_high_page). Could you rephrase that? I'm having trouble figuring out what you meant. -- wli