Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder versions

Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:56:07 -0700 


> On Mar 19, 2019, at 10:33 PM, Jerome Glisse <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> So i believe best we could do is send a SIGBUS to the process that has
> GUPed a range of a file that is being truncated this would match what
> we do for CPU acces. There is no reason access through GUP should be
> handled any differently.

This should be done lazily, as there's no need to send the SIGBUS unless
the GUPed page is actually accessed post-truncate.

























					Reply via email to