On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 10:42:52PM +0800, Li Xinhai wrote: >On 2020-01-13 at 19:07 Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote: > >> >>Because I want to keep both heuristics. >>This seems most sane way of interaction between them. >> >>Unfortunately even this patch is slightly broken. >>Condition prev->anon_vma->parent == pvma->anon_vma doesn't guarantee that >>prev vma has the same set of anon-vmas like current vma. >>I.e. anon_vma_clone(vma, prev) might be not enough for keeping connectivity. > >New patch is required? My suggestion is separate the fix and new approach instead of mess them into one patch. >It is necessary to call anon_vma_clone(vma, pvma) to link all anon_vma which >currently linked by pvma, then link the prev->anon_vma to vma. By this way, >connectivity of vma should be maintained, right? > >>Building such case isn't trivial job but I see nothing that could prevent it. >> > -- Wei Yang Help you, Help me
