> diff --git v3.9-rc3.orig/mm/hugetlb.c v3.9-rc3/mm/hugetlb.c
> index 0a0be33..98a478e 100644
> --- v3.9-rc3.orig/mm/hugetlb.c
> +++ v3.9-rc3/mm/hugetlb.c
> @@ -2819,7 +2819,7 @@ int hugetlb_fault(struct mm_struct *mm, struct
> vm_area_struct *vma,
> if (ptep) {
> entry = huge_ptep_get(ptep);
> if (unlikely(is_hugetlb_entry_migration(entry))) {
> - migration_entry_wait(mm, (pmd_t *)ptep, address);
> + migration_entry_wait_huge(mm, (pmd_t *)ptep, address);
Hm.
How do you test this? From x86 point of view, this patch seems unnecessary
because
hugetlb_fault call "address &= hugetlb_mask()" at first and then
migration_entry_wait()
could grab right pte lock. And from !x86 point of view, this funciton still
doesn't work
because huge page != pmd on some arch.
I might be missing something though.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
