On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 12:48 +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 12:00:55PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > Hi, Adam, Bill, Hugh,
> >
> > Does this look like a reasonable patch to send to akpm for -mm.
>
> Ahem. Or rather this version, which actually compiles.
>
> This patch makes some slight tweaks / cleanups to the fault handling
> path for huge pages in -mm. My main motivation is to make it simpler
> to fit COW in, but along the way it addresses a few minor problems
> with the existing code:
>
> - The check against i_size was duplicated: once in
> find_lock_huge_page() and again in hugetlb_fault() after taking the
> page_table_lock. We only really need the locked one, so remove the
> other.
Fair enough.
> - find_lock_huge_page() didn't, in fact, lock the page if it newly
> allocated one, rather than finding it in the page cache already. As
> far as I can tell this is a bug, so the patch corrects it.
Thanks. I was about to post a fix for this too. It is reproducible in
the case where two threads race in the fault handler and both do
alloc_huge_page(). In that case, the loser will fail to insert his page
into the page cache and will call put_page() which has a
BUG_ON(page_count(page) == 0).
> - find_lock_huge_page() isn't a great name, since it does extra things
> not analagous to find_lock_page(). Rename it
> find_or_alloc_huge_page() which is closer to the mark.
I'll agree with the above. I am not all that committed to the current
layout and what you have here is a little closer to the thinking in my
original patch ;)
<snip>
> +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;
> }
I'll agree with Ken that the last return should probably still be
VM_FAULT_MINOR.
--
Adam Litke - (agl at us.ibm.com)
IBM Linux Technology Center
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
