From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753897AbZBEU4e (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Feb 2009 15:56:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752835AbZBEU4N (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Feb 2009 15:56:13 -0500 Received: from movementarian.org ([79.99.65.163]:59375 "EHLO movementarian.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752749AbZBEU4M (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Feb 2009 15:56:12 -0500 Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 15:56:06 -0500 From: wli@movementarian.org To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Ingo Molnar , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Memory Management List Subject: Re: pud_bad vs pud_bad Message-ID: <20090205205606.GG10229@movementarian.org> References: <498B2EBC.60700@goop.org> <20090205184355.GF5661@elte.hu> <498B35F9.601@goop.org> <20090205191017.GF20470@elte.hu> <20090205194932.GB3129@elte.hu> <20090205195817.GF10229@movementarian.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 5 Feb 2009, wli@movementarian.org wrote: >> The RW bit needs to be allowed to become read-only for hugetlb COW. >> Changing it over to the 32-bit method is a bugfix by that token. On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 08:14:42PM +0000, Hugh Dickins wrote: > If there's a bugfix to be made there, of course I'm in favour: > but how come we've never seen such a bug? hugetlb COW has been > around for a year or two by now, hasn't it? We can tell from the code that a write-protected pte mapping of a 1GB hugetlb page would be flagged as bad. It must not be called on ptes mapping hugetlb pages if they're not getting flagged. -- wli