[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Subject[PATCH 0/3] Demand faulting for hugetlb
Ok, here's the next iteration of these patches.  I think I've handled
the truncate() case by comparing the hugetlbfs inode's i_size with the
mapping offset of the requested page to make sure it hasn't been
truncated. Can anyone confirm or deny that I have the locking correct
for this? The other patches are still unchanged. Andrew: Did Andi
Kleen's explanation of huge_pages_needed() satisfy?
Adam Litke - (agl at
IBM Linux Technology Center

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-10-11 20:28    [W:0.048 / U:2.392 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site