From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
To: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: <tglx@linutronix.de>, <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Andi Kleen" <ak@suse.de>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: fix ref-counting bug in change_page_attr()
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 08:38:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47624F26.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47622CC5.3060903@goop.org>
>>> Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> 14.12.07 08:12 >>>
>Jan Beulich wrote:
>> When either calling change_page_attr() with the default attributes
>> pages in the direct mapping have and a page's attributes already were
>> set to the default or when changing the attributes from one non-default
>> value to another, the reference counting broke, leading to either
>> premature restoration of a large page or missing the opportunity to do
>> so.
>>
>> At the same time, make __PHYSICAL_MASK_SHIFT on 64-bits the value it
>> architecturally ought to have.
>>
>
>Could you put this in a separate patch? I have a bunch of page*.h and
>pgtable*.h refactoring patches which will conflict with this.
I doesn't seem logical to do so: The patch needs to introduce the definitions
for 32-bits (in order to define pte_pgprot()), and not doing the adjustment
for 64-bits here means (a) becoming inconsistent and (b) the pte_pgprot()
there would be incorrect. So such a split out patch would need to be a pre-
requisite to the one here, which wouldn't help avoiding the collisions with
your unification patches.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-14 8:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-13 9:34 [PATCH] x86: fix ref-counting bug in change_page_attr() Jan Beulich
2007-12-14 7:12 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-12-14 8:38 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2007-12-17 13:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-17 13:41 ` Jan Beulich
2007-12-17 14:34 ` Ingo Molnar
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=47624F26.76E4.0078.0@novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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