> On Mar 9, 2020, at 11:05 AM, Rafael Aquini <aquini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm still waiting on a similar system to become available, so I can > work on your reproducer case, as well as to dig and wrap my head around it. > > I still don't think that skipping the pmd_none() in the change-protection walk > should cause a big fuss like you observed here (yet, it seems it does), and > the fact that we need that race window to take the __split_huge_pmd() suggests, > at least to me, that we might be missing this proper split somewhere else. I have sent out another patch which should be more correct, https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200310235846.1319-1-cai@xxxxxx/
