From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <419358FF.2070009@yahoo.com.au> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 23:20:15 +1100 From: Nick Piggin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: follow_page() References: <20041111024015.7c50c13d.akpm@osdl.org> <1100170570.2646.27.camel@laptop.fenrus.org> <20041111030634.1d06a7c1.akpm@osdl.org> <1100171453.2646.29.camel@laptop.fenrus.org> <419353D5.2080902@yahoo.com.au> <20041111041111.185c29e5.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20041111041111.185c29e5.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: arjan@infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Andrew Morton wrote: > Nick Piggin wrote: > >>Kill it..? > > > Think so. We'd need to review all callers to make sure that they really > are marking pages dirty after modifying them. Right now someone may just > be feeling lucky. > > (looks at access_process_vm, wonders why it isn't doing flush_dcache_page). > Is it because copy_{to,from}_user_page already does flushing? Looks like it... sorry, I'm not quite up to speed on this so I'll stop talking crap for now :) I think you're definitely right about your original concern though, and the callers should be all checked. -- 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: aart@kvack.org