On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 06:49:51PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Hi Kirill,
>
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 07:30:58PM +0200, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > Merged patch is obviously broken: huge_pmd_set_accessed() can be called
> > only if the pmd is under splitting.
>
> Of course I assume you meant "only if the pmd is not under splitting".
The broken merged patch has this:
+ if (dirty && !pmd_write(orig_pmd) &&
!pmd_trans_splitting(orig_pmd)) {
[...]
+ } else {
+ huge_pmd_set_accessed(mm, vma, address, pmd,
+ orig_pmd, dirty);
}
> But no, setting a bitflag like the young bit or clearing or setting
> the numa bit won't screw with split_huge_page and it's safe even if
> the pmd is under splitting.
Okay. Thanks for clarification for me.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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>