Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, David S. Miller wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 19:36:46 +0000 (GMT)
Hugh Dickins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I notice that although both i386 and sparc64 use pgtable-nopud.h, the
i386 pud_clear does nothing at all and the sparc64 pud_clear resets to 0.
This was a dead end. I386 doesn't do anything with pud_clear() in
order to work around a chip erratum.
IA64 does clear in pud_clear() just like sparc64.
My mind kept flipping back and forth on whether it was pud_clear().
I agree, I can't see that it's the issue now.
It shouldn't be.
In the case that pud is folded, free_pud_range will only call into
free_pmd_range once, and that function will loop over the required
range of the pud (ie. the pmd). If it then also falls through to
pud_clear in that function, it will also fall through to pgd_clear
in free_pud_range. So it doesn't _really_ matter which one does the
actual clearing in that case.
I think David's on the right track - I think there's something a
bit wrong at the top. In my reply to Andrew in this thread I
posted a patch which may at least get things working...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
