From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.106]) by e35.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k2FFGGsS031781 for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:16:16 -0500 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (d03av04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.170]) by d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.8) with ESMTP id k2FFHtJm154818 for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 08:17:55 -0700 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k2FFExZx013601 for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 08:14:59 -0700 Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:14:14 -0800 From: Nishanth Aravamudan Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: BUG in x86_64 hugepage support Message-ID: <20060315151414.GE5620@us.ibm.com> References: <4417E359.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> <200603151003.k2FA30g14232@unix-os.sc.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200603151003.k2FA30g14232@unix-os.sc.intel.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: "Chen, Kenneth W" Cc: 'Jan Beulich' , david@gibson.dropbear.id.au, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andreas Kleen , agl@us.ibm.com, discuss@x86-64.org List-ID: On 15.03.2006 [02:03:00 -0800], Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > Nishanth Aravamudan wrote on Tuesday, March 14, 2006 11:31 PM > > Description: We currently fail mprotect testing in libhugetlbfs because > > the PSE bit in the hugepage PTEs gets unset. In the case where we know > > that a filled hugetlb PTE is going to have its protection changed, make > > sure it stays a hugetlb PTE by setting the PSE bit in the new protection > > flags. > > Jan Beulich wrote on Wednesday, March 15, 2006 12:50 AM > > This is architecture independent code - you shouldn't be using > > _PAGE_PSE here. Probably x86-64 (and then likely also i386) should > > define their own set_huge_pte_at(), and use that# to or in the > > needed flag? > > > Yeah, that will do. i386, x86_64 should also clean up pte_mkhuge() > macro. The unconditional setting of _PAGE_PRESENT bit was a leftover > stuff from the good'old day of pre-faulting hugetlb page. Patch looks correct, I'll reboot with it applied and make sure it fixes the BUGs (and doesn't affect any of the other tests). Thanks, Nish -- Nishanth Aravamudan IBM Linux Technology Center -- 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