From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1758336AbXIXVmd@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1758336AbXIXVmd (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 24 Sep 2007 17:42:33 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754234AbXIXVm0
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Mon, 24 Sep 2007 17:42:26 -0400
Received: from netops-testserver-4-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.29]:59814 "EHLO
	relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753828AbXIXVmZ (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 24 Sep 2007 17:42:25 -0400
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:42:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
X-X-Sender: clameter@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
       akpm@linux-foundation.org, ak@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       tony.luck@intel.com, asit.k.mallick@intel.com
Subject: Re: x86_64: potential critical issue with quicklists and page table
 pages
In-Reply-To: <1190669265.6886.69.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709241438220.31469@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
References: <20070921180742.GH20863@linux-os.sc.intel.com> 
 <alpine.LFD.0.999.0709211139550.16478@woody.linux-foundation.org> 
 <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709211149040.17160@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> 
 <alpine.LFD.0.999.0709211153060.16478@woody.linux-foundation.org> 
 <alpine.LFD.0.999.0709211204050.16478@woody.linux-foundation.org> 
 <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709211205570.17160@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> 
 <alpine.LFD.0.999.0709211212130.16478@woody.linux-foundation.org>
 <1190669265.6886.69.camel@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

> I'd suggest just reverting the patch for now (well, I see from the
> commit list that you did just that) and I'll try to come up with
> something better.

That would be great. Note that the reversal of the x86_64 quicklist 
support patch does not address the issue that is (as pointed out by 
Siddha) in core code and not in x86_64 arch dode. The fix that I posted 
fixes the core issue.

> Christoph, I'd be happy if you didn't start butchering mmu_gather just
> right now since I'm doing just that and it will collide all over the
> place :-) Or if you want something specific done, please throw
> ideas/patches at me and I'll integrate that in my serie.

Any "butchering" was done for 2.6.22. 2.6.23 only added arch support for 
x86_64 since Andi forgot to merge it for .22. I'd be glad if you could 
look into this and make quicklists interoperate nicely withh mmu gather.