On Wed, 2 Jul 2014 17:44:46 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > @@ -2248,36 +2257,18 @@ static int hugetlb_sysctl_handler_common(bool obey_mempolicy, > > > void __user *buffer, size_t *length, loff_t *ppos) > > > { > > > struct hstate *h = &default_hstate; > > > - unsigned long tmp; > > > + unsigned long tmp = h->max_huge_pages; > > > int ret; > > > > > > - if (!hugepages_supported()) > > > - return -ENOTSUPP; > > > > Shouldn't you add this check to __nr_hugepages_store_common()? Otherwise > > looks good to me. > > > > Hmm, I think you're right but I don't think __nr_hugepages_store_common() > is the right place: if we have a legitimate hstate for the sysfs tunables > then we should support hugepages. I think this should be kept in > hugetlb_sysctl_handler_common(). This? --- a/mm/hugetlb.c~mm-hugetlb-generalize-writes-to-nr_hugepages-fix +++ a/mm/hugetlb.c @@ -2260,6 +2260,9 @@ static int hugetlb_sysctl_handler_common unsigned long tmp = h->max_huge_pages; int ret; + if (!hugepages_supported()) + return -ENOTSUPP; + table->data = &tmp; table->maxlen = sizeof(unsigned long); ret = proc_doulongvec_minmax(table, write, buffer, length, ppos); _ -- 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>