RE: RFC: Cleanup / small fixes to hugetlb fault handling

["Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>]

David Gibson wrote on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 7:49 PM
> +int hugetlb_fault(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> +		  unsigned long address, int write_access)
> +{
> +	pte_t *ptep;
> +	pte_t entry;
> +
> +	ptep = huge_pte_alloc(mm, address);
> +	if (! ptep)
> +		/* OOM */
> +		return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
> +
> +	entry = *ptep;
> +
> +	if (pte_none(entry))
> +		return hugetlb_no_page(mm, vma, address, ptep);
> +
> +	/* we could get here if another thread instantiated the pte
> +	 * before the test above */
> +
> +	return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
>  }

Are you sure about the last return?  Looks like a typo to me, if *ptep
is present, it should return VM_FAULT_MINOR.

But the bigger question is: don't you need some lock when checking *ptep?

- Ken

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/