> Plus I'd have expected the problem to have been in mainline too, and > apparently it's just the 4.4 and 4.9 backports.
There's another problem in 4.17, but not 4.18, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1618792 Could be the same or different. -Andi > > Your test-case does have mprotect with PROT_NONE. Which together with > that mask that *might* be PHYSICAL_PMD_PAGE_MASK makes me think it > might be related. > > Linus
