On Monday, 15 November 2021 6:55:02 PM AEDT Peter Xu wrote: > We used to check against none pte and in those cases orig_pte should always be > none pte anyway. Is that always true? From what I can see in handle_pte_fault() orig_pte only gets initialised in the !pmd_none() case so might not be pte_none. > This change prepares us to be able to call do_fault() on !none ptes. For > example, we should allow that to happen for pte marker so that we can restore > information out of the pte markers. > > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > mm/memory.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c > index 04662b010005..d5966d9e24c3 100644 > --- a/mm/memory.c > +++ b/mm/memory.c > @@ -4052,7 +4052,7 @@ vm_fault_t finish_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf) > vmf->address, &vmf->ptl); > ret = 0; > /* Re-check under ptl */ > - if (likely(pte_none(*vmf->pte))) > + if (likely(pte_same(*vmf->pte, vmf->orig_pte))) > do_set_pte(vmf, page, vmf->address); > else > ret = VM_FAULT_NOPAGE; >
