Hi Larry, On Wed 01-08-12 11:06:33, Larry Woodman wrote: > On 08/01/2012 08:32 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > >I am really lame :/. The previous patch is wrong as well for goto out > >branch. The updated patch as follows: > This patch worked fine Michal! Thanks for the good news! > You and Mel can duke it out over who's is best. :) The answer is clear here ;) Mel did the hard work of identifying the culprit so kudos go to him. I just tried to solve the issue more inside x86 arch code. The pmd allocation outside of sharing code seemed strange to me for quite some time I just underestimated its consequences completely. Both approaches have some pros. Mel's patch is more resistant to other not-yet-discovered races and it also makes the arch independent code more robust because relying on the pmd trick is not ideal. On the other hand, mine is more coupled with the sharing code so it makes the code easier to follow and also makes the sharing more effective because racing processes see pmd populated when checking for shareable mappings. So I am more inclined to mine but I don't want to push it because both are good and make sense. What other people think? > > Larry > -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>