> diff --git v3.9-rc3.orig/mm/hugetlb.c v3.9-rc3/mm/hugetlb.c
> index 0a0be33..98a478e 100644
> --- v3.9-rc3.orig/mm/hugetlb.c
> +++ v3.9-rc3/mm/hugetlb.c
> @@ -2819,7 +2819,7 @@ int hugetlb_fault(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> if (ptep) {
> entry = huge_ptep_get(ptep);
> if (unlikely(is_hugetlb_entry_migration(entry))) {
> - migration_entry_wait(mm, (pmd_t *)ptep, address);
> + migration_entry_wait_huge(mm, (pmd_t *)ptep, address);
Hm.
How do you test this? From x86 point of view, this patch seems unnecessary because
hugetlb_fault call "address &= hugetlb_mask()" at first and then migration_entry_wait()
could grab right pte lock. And from !x86 point of view, this funciton still doesn't work
because huge page != pmd on some arch.
I might be missing though.
--
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>