Re: Regression: x86/mm: new _PTE_SWP_SOFT_DIRTY bit conflicts withexisting use

[Dave Jones]

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 04:04:54PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
 > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
 > >
 > > I personally don't see bug here because
 > >
 > >  - this swapped page soft dirty bit is set for non-present entries only,
 > >    never for present ones, just at moment we form swap pte entry
 > >
 > >  - i don't find any code which would test for this bit directly without
 > >    is_swap_pte call
 > 
 > Ok, having gone through the places that use swp_*soft_dirty(), I have
 > to agree. Afaik, it's only ever used on a swap-entry that has (by
 > definition) the P bit clear. So with or without Xen, I don't see how
 > it can make any difference.
 > 
 > David/Konrad - did you actually see any issues, or was this just from
 > (mis)reading the code?

Could this explain what I'm seeing in another thread ?
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/7/27

	Dave

--
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/