On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Anton Salikhmetov wrote:Your current patches have two problems: - they are simply unnecessarily invasive for a relatively simple issue - all versions I've looked at closer are buggy too Example: + if (pte_dirty(*pte) && pte_write(*pte)) + *pte = pte_wrprotect(*pte); Uhhuh. Looks simple enough. Except it does a non-atomic pte access while other CPU's may be accessing it and updating it from their hw page table walkers. What will happen? Who knows? I can see lost access bits at a minimum. IOW, this isn't simple code. It's code that it is simple to screw up. In this case, you really need to use ptep_set_wrprotect(), for example. So why not do it in many fewer lines with that simpler vma->dirty flag? Linus --
| Dave Hansen | [RFC][PATCH 0/4] kernel-based checkpoint restart |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
| Bart Van Assche | Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| Eric Paris | [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a linux interface for on access scanning |
git: | |
| David Miller | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
