On Thu, 20 Dec 2012, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Going through some old emails before -rc1 rlease..
>
> What is the status of this patch? The patch that is reported to cause
> the problem hasn't been merged, but that mpol_misplaced() thing did
> happen in commit 771fb4d806a9. And it looks like it's called from
> numa_migrate_prep() under the pte map lock. Or am I missing something?
Andrew pinged both Ingo and I about it privately two weeks ago. It
probably doesn't trigger right now because there's no pte_mknuma() on
shared pages (yet) but will eventually be needed for correctness. So it's
not required for -rc1 as it sits in the tree today but will be needed
later (and hopefully not forgotten about until Sasha fuzzes again).
> See commit 9532fec118d ("mm: numa: Migrate pages handled during a
> pmd_numa hinting fault").
>
> Am I missing something? Mel, please take another look.
>
> I despise these kinds of dual-locking models, and am wondering if we
> can't have *just* the spinlock?
>
Adding KOSAKI to the cc.
This is probably worth discussing now to see if we can't revert
b22d127a39dd ("mempolicy: fix a race in shared_policy_replace()"), keep it
only as a spinlock as you suggest, and do what KOSAKI suggested in
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=133940650731255 instead. I don't think
it's worth trying to optimize this path at the cost of having both a
spinlock and mutex.
--
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>