Obviously no objection from the futex side of things, looks good. Couple nits on the function comment:
On 07/18/2011 09:29 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: ... > -/** > +/* > + * fixup_user_fault() - manually resolve a user page fault s/ fault/ fault/ > + * @tsk: the task_struct to use for page fault accounting, or > + * NULL if faults are not to be recorded. > + * @mm: mm_struct of target mm > + * @address: user address > + * @fault_flags:flags to pass down to handle_mm_fault() > + * > + * This is meant to be called in the specific scenario where for > + * locking reasons we try to access user memory in atomic context > + * (within a pagefault_disable() section), this returns -EFAULT, > + * and we want to resolve the user fault before trying again. > + * > + * Typically this is meant to be used by the futex code. > + * > + * The main difference with get_user_pages() is that this function > + * will unconditionally call handle_mm_fault() which will in turn > + * perform all the necessary SW fixup of the dirty and young bits > + * in the PTE, while handle_mm_fault() only guarantees to update > + * these in the struct page. > + * > + * This is important for some architectures where those bits also > + * gate the access permission to the page because their are s/their/they/ Thanks, -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
