Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mm: move huge_pmd_set_accessed out of huge_memory.c | From | "Shi, Yang" <> | Date | Fri, 29 Apr 2016 11:09:36 -0700 |
| |
On 4/22/2016 2:48 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 03:56:07PM -0700, Shi, Yang wrote: >> On 4/21/2016 12:30 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 02:00:11PM -0700, Shi, Yang wrote: >>>> Hi folks, >>>> >>>> I didn't realize pmd_* functions are protected by >>>> CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE on the most architectures before I made this >>>> change. >>>> >>>> Before I fix all the affected architectures code, I want to check if you >>>> guys think this change is worth or not? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Yang >>>> >>>> On 4/20/2016 11:24 AM, Yang Shi wrote: >>>>> huge_pmd_set_accessed is only called by __handle_mm_fault from memory.c, >>>>> move the definition to memory.c and make it static like create_huge_pmd and >>>>> wp_huge_pmd. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org> >>> >>> On pte side we have the same functionality open-coded. Should we do the >>> same for pmd? Or change pte side the same way? >> >> Sorry, I don't quite understand you. Do you mean pte_* functions? > > See handle_pte_fault(), we do the same for pte there what > huge_pmd_set_accessed() does for pmd.
Thanks for directing to this code.
> > I think we should be consistent here: either both are abstructed into > functions or both open-coded.
I'm supposed functions sound better. However, do_wp_page has to be called with pte lock acquired. So, the abstracted function has to call it.
Thanks, Yang
>
| |