On Sun, 12 Feb 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> I'm scratching my head over flush_dcache_page() on, say, sparc64. For
> example, the one in fs/direct-io.c. With this patch, we'll call
> flush_dcache_page_impl(), which at least won't crash. Before the patch I
> think we'd just do random stuff.
A head-scratching business indeed. I think your description is right.
I haven't looked up the intersection of the set of arches which have
hugetlb with the set of arches which do something in flush_dcache_page,
but maybe you have, and found sparc64 the only or most significant.
> But I'm not sure that flush_dcache_page(hugetlb tail page) will do the
> right thing in aither case?
Probably not; but nobody seems to have noticed. Perhaps it all comes
right in the end somehow. I haven't much of a clue.
Remember that 1/3 is only changing page[1].mapping i.e. it's making
the first tail page behave like all the other constituents of the
compound page, so it can hardly be making matters worse.
Hugh
-
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]
