From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:05:02 -0800 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] hugetlb: synchronize alloc with page cache insert Message-ID: <20060112010502.GG9091@holomorphy.com> References: <1137018263.9672.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200601120040.k0C0ebg02818@unix-os.sc.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200601120040.k0C0ebg02818@unix-os.sc.intel.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: "Chen, Kenneth W" Cc: 'Adam Litke' , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 04:40:37PM -0800, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > What if two processes fault on the same page and races with find_lock_page(), > both find page not in the page cache. The process won the race proceed to > allocate last hugetlb page. While the other will exit with SIGBUS. > In theory, both processes should be OK. This is supposed to fix the incarnation of that as a preexisting problem, but you're right, there is no fallback or retry for the case of hugepage queue exhaustion. For some reason I saw a phantom page allocator fallback in the hugepage allocator changes. Looks like back to the drawing board for this pair of patches, though I'd be more than happy to get a solution to this. -- wli -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org