Re: [PATCH v2] tmpfs not interleaving properly

[Nathan Zimmer]

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 04:35:53PM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> (5/31/12 4:25 PM), Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 May 2012 16:09:15 -0400
>> KOSAKI Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
>>
>>>> --- a/mm/shmem.c
>>>> +++ b/mm/shmem.c
>>>> @@ -929,7 +929,7 @@ static struct page *shmem_alloc_page(gfp_t gfp,
>>>>    	/*
>>>>    	 * alloc_page_vma() will drop the shared policy reference
>>>>    	 */
>>>> -	return alloc_page_vma(gfp,&pvma, 0);
>>>> +	return alloc_page_vma(gfp,&pvma, info->node_offset<<   PAGE_SHIFT );
>>>
>>> 3rd argument of alloc_page_vma() is an address. This is type error.
>>
>> Well, it's an unsigned long...
>>
>> But yes, it is conceptually wrong and *looks* weird.  I think we can
>> address that by overcoming our peculair aversion to documenting our
>> code, sigh.  This?
>
> Sorry, no.
>
> addr agrument of alloc_pages_vma() have two meanings.
>
> 1) interleave node seed
> 2) look-up key of shmem policy
>
> I think this patch break (2). shmem_get_policy(pol, addr) assume caller honor to
> pass correct address.

But the pseudo vma we generated in shmem_alloc_page the vm_ops are set to NULL.
So get_vma_policy will return the policy provided by the pseudo vma and not reach
the shmem_get_policy.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/