On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 02:51:09PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> @@ -1246,11 +1241,13 @@ void page_add_anon_rmap(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>
> if (likely(!folio_test_ksm(folio))) {
> if (first)
> - __page_set_anon_rmap(folio, page, vma, address,
> - !!(flags & RMAP_EXCLUSIVE));
> + __folio_set_anon(folio, vma, address,
> + !!(flags & RMAP_EXCLUSIVE));
> else
> __page_check_anon_rmap(folio, page, vma, address);
> }
> + if (flags & RMAP_EXCLUSIVE)
> + SetPageAnonExclusive(page);
Won't we end up setting AnonExclusive on ksm pages, or do we make sure
to never pass RMAP_EXCLUSIVE for ksm pages?
Maybe better to move these last two lines inside the previous test,
just to avoid the question.
