On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 10:08:31PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > > There's no modification to anon_vma interval tree. We only need to > > serialize against exclusive rmap walker who want s to catch all ptes the > > page is mapped with. Shared lock is enough for that. > > > > Suggested-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@xxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > NAK: please read Michel's comment on need_rmap_locks again, there is > no point in using read locks on anon_vma (and i_mmap) here, those will > not exclude the read locks on anon_vma (and i_mmap) in the rmap walk, > while we move ptes around. > > Or am I confused? Andrew, please drop the patch. -- 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>