From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 08:20:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 08:20:41 -0500 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:56585 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 08:20:36 -0500 From: Russell King Message-Id: <200012291152.eBTBq9x02036@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Subject: test13-pre5: Double flush_cache_page? To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 11:52:08 +0000 (GMT) Cc: riel@nl.linux.org X-Location: london.england.earth.mulky-way.universe X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Is the following really intentional? vmscan.c:122: flush_cache_page(vma, address); if (!pte_dirty(pte)) goto drop_pte; ... flush_cache_page(vma, address); if (page->mapping) { Nothing accesses the actual page between the two flush_cache_page() calls, the first one was added in test13-pre5. Should test13-pre5 have removed the second instance? _____ |_____| ------------------------------------------------- ---+---+- | | Russell King rmk@arm.linux.org.uk --- --- | | | | http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html / / | | +-+-+ --- -+- / | THE developer of ARM Linux |+| /|\ / | | | --- | +-+-+ ------------------------------------------------- /\\\ | - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/