On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 01:19:20PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 8 Jul 2014 23:21:51 +0400 Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Otherwise we may not notice that pte was softdirty because pte_mksoft_dirty > > helper _returns_ new pte but not modifies argument. > > When fixing a bug, please describe the end-user visible effects of that > bug. > > [for the 12,000th time :(] "we may not notice that pte was softdirty" I thought it's enough, because that's the effect user sees -- pte is not dirtified where it should. Really sorry Andrew if I were not clear enough. What about: In case if page fault happend on dirty filemapping the newly created pte may not notice if old one were already softdirtified because pte_mksoft_dirty doesn't modify its argument but rather returns new pte value. -- 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>