On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 01:19:20PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 8 Jul 2014 23:21:51 +0400 Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Otherwise we may not notice that pte was softdirty because pte_mksoft_dirty > > helper _returns_ new pte but not modifies argument. > > When fixing a bug, please describe the end-user visible effects of that > bug. > > [for the 12,000th time :(]
"we may not notice that pte was softdirty" I thought it's enough, because that's the effect user sees -- pte is not dirtified where it should. Really sorry Andrew if I were not clear enough. What about: In case if page fault happend on dirty filemapping the newly created pte may not notice if old one were already softdirtified because pte_mksoft_dirty doesn't modify its argument but rather returns new pte value. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
