On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > + write = error_code & PF_WRITE;
>
> What's going on here? We set `error_code' to PF_WRITE, which is some
> x86-specific thing.
No. We set "write" to non-zero if it was a write fault.
> > fault = handle_mm_fault(mm, vma, address, write);
>
> and then pass it into handle_mm_fault(), which is expecting a bunch of
> flags in the FAULT_FLAG_foo domain.
No. "handle_mm_fault()" takes an integer that is non-zero if it's a write,
zero if it's a read. That's how it has _always_ worked.
I don't see where you find that FAULT_FLAG_foo thing. That's much deeper
down, when people do things like
unsigned int flags = FAULT_FLAG_NONLINEAR |
(write_access ? FAULT_FLAG_WRITE : 0);
based on that whole "write_access" flag.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
