From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933051AbXCMTQ1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:16:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933054AbXCMTQ1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:16:27 -0400 Received: from postfix2-g20.free.fr ([212.27.60.43]:37828 "EHLO postfix2-g20.free.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933051AbXCMTQ0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:16:26 -0400 Message-ID: <45F6F84D.20302@free.fr> Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 20:15:25 +0100 From: Zoltan Menyhart User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20060414 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, fr, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@vger.kernel.org CC: Zoltan Menyhart Subject: copy_one_pte() Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I had a look at copy_one_pte(). I cannot see any ioproc_update_page() call, not even for the COW pages. Is it intentional? We can live with a COW page for a considerably long time. How could the IO-PROC. know that a process-ID / user virt. addr. pair refers to the same page? The comment above ioproc_update_page() says that every time when a PTE is created / modified... Thanks, Zoltan Menyhart