On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 02:17:32PM -0800, Mike Kravetz wrote: > Am I misunderstanding your question/concern?
No. Thanks for the clarification. > > I have decided to add the locking (although unnecessary) with something like > this in hugetlbfs_evict_inode. > > /* > * The vfs layer guarantees that there are no other users of this > * inode. Therefore, it would be safe to call remove_inode_hugepages > * without holding i_mmap_rwsem. We acquire and hold here to be > * consistent with other callers. Since there will be no contention > * on the semaphore, overhead is negligible. > */ > i_mmap_lock_write(mapping); > remove_inode_hugepages(inode, 0, LLONG_MAX); > i_mmap_unlock_write(mapping); LGTM. -- Kirill A. Shutemov
