On 12/17/2012 12:24 PM, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:52:47AM -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
>> static inline int huge_ptep_set_access_flags(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>> unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep,
>> pte_t pte, int dirty)
>> {
>> - return ptep_set_access_flags(vma, addr, ptep, pte, dirty);
>> + int changed = !pte_same(*ptep, pte);
>> + if (changed) {
>> + set_huge_pte_at(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pte);
>> + flush_tlb_page(vma, addr);
>> + }
>> + return changed;
>> }
>
> I've no idea what this really does, but I noticed that you are ignoring the
> 'dirty' parameter in the new version. If it's irrelevant, maybe make a note
> of it to avoid the impression it got lost?
It seems x86 is the only architecture that pays any attention to this
flag. ptep_set_access_flags() ignores it as well.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
