Hi guys,
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 08:01:39AM +0000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in mm/memory.c
> between changes in commits from the tip tree and commit "mm: thp: set the
> accessed flag for old pages on access fault" from the akpm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary
> (no action is required).
[...]
> diff --cc mm/memory.c
> index 8022526,60201d5..0000000
> --- a/mm/memory.c
> +++ b/mm/memory.c
> @@@ -3812,15 -3620,18 +3812,17 @@@ retry
> pmd, flags);
> } else {
> pmd_t orig_pmd = *pmd;
> - int ret = 0;
> + int ret;
>
> barrier();
> - if (pmd_trans_huge(orig_pmd) && !pmd_trans_splitting(orig_pmd)) {
> + if (pmd_trans_huge(orig_pmd)) {
This change worries me a bit wrt the huge_pmd_set_accessed function I
introduce below. Unfortunately, current -next doesn't seem to include it, so
I can't see whether do_huge_pmd_numa_page / do_huge_pmd_wp_page have been
changed to deal with the splitting or whether the check has been moved
earlier.
Will
> + unsigned int dirty = flags & FAULT_FLAG_WRITE;
> +
> - if (pmd_numa(vma, orig_pmd)) {
> - do_huge_pmd_numa_page(mm, vma, address, pmd,
> - flags, orig_pmd);
> - }
> + if (pmd_numa(*pmd))
> + return do_huge_pmd_numa_page(mm, vma, address,
> + orig_pmd, pmd);
>
> - if ((flags & FAULT_FLAG_WRITE) && !pmd_write(orig_pmd)) {
> + if (dirty && !pmd_write(orig_pmd)) {
> ret = do_huge_pmd_wp_page(mm, vma, address, pmd,
> orig_pmd);
> /*
> @@@ -3830,10 -3641,12 +3832,13 @@@
> */
> if (unlikely(ret & VM_FAULT_OOM))
> goto retry;
> + return ret;
> + } else {
> + huge_pmd_set_accessed(mm, vma, address, pmd,
> + orig_pmd, dirty);
> }
>
> - return ret;
> + return 0;
> }
> }
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
