diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/gmap.c b/arch/s390/mm/gmap.c
index 6f96b5a71c63..e083fade7a5d 100644
--- a/arch/s390/mm/gmap.c
+++ b/arch/s390/mm/gmap.c
@@ -1691,6 +1691,7 @@ struct gmap *gmap_shadow(struct gmap *parent, unsigned long asce,
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
new->mm = parent->mm;
new->parent = gmap_get(parent);
+ new->private = patent->private;
new->orig_asce = asce;
new->edat_level = edat_level;
new->initialized = false;
Or am I missing something?
That would work as well. I discussed several alternatives with Janosch.
The only thing that bothers me is that the owner should define private. So an
alternative would be to have a parameter for gmap_shadow. On the other hand I
like the simplicity of this patch. (we need to get rid of the 2nd assignment
in acquire_gmap_shadow to make it complete.
Right. Conceptually, the owner setup parent->private and the owner
requests to create a shadow. So inheriting the ->private setting does
not sound completely wrong.
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
