On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 06:23 -0800, Greg KH wrote: > I have no idea what that means... > > If you want this patch applied, please be specific as to what is going > on, why the code is _very_ different, and all of that. Make it > _obvious_ as to what is happening, and why I would be a fool not to > take > it in the stable tree. > > As it is, the code in this patch looks so different that I'm just > assuming you got something wrong and are trying to really send me > something else, so I'll just ignore it. It looks very different because the function that needs to be fixed changed a lot upstream in 3.13. In practice it's *not* very different in behaviour. It's just that on powerpc we need to unconditionally call withdraw and deposit when moving PTEs or it will crash, due to how we keep the transparent huge page in sync with the hash table. With the 3.13 code, due to lock breaking introduced by Kirill in 3.13-rc's, there's already a generic case for doing that (if we dropped the lock). So we just changed the condition to essentially force the condition to true to always do it under control of an arch helper. The pre-3.13 code didn't do the withdraw and deposit at all in that function however, so in that case, the patch (this 3.12 one) basically just adds the calls to withdraw and deposit under control of an ifdef which is only enabled for powerpc64. So you are taking 0 risk with other architecture and as the powerpc maintainer I'm happy with the patch. Cheers, Ben. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html