On Wed, 2 Jul 2014 17:44:46 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes <[email protected]>
wrote:
> > > @@ -2248,36 +2257,18 @@ static int hugetlb_sysctl_handler_common(bool
> > > obey_mempolicy,
> > > void __user *buffer, size_t *length, loff_t *ppos)
> > > {
> > > struct hstate *h = &default_hstate;
> > > - unsigned long tmp;
> > > + unsigned long tmp = h->max_huge_pages;
> > > int ret;
> > >
> > > - if (!hugepages_supported())
> > > - return -ENOTSUPP;
> >
> > Shouldn't you add this check to __nr_hugepages_store_common()? Otherwise
> > looks good to me.
> >
>
> Hmm, I think you're right but I don't think __nr_hugepages_store_common()
> is the right place: if we have a legitimate hstate for the sysfs tunables
> then we should support hugepages. I think this should be kept in
> hugetlb_sysctl_handler_common().
This?
--- a/mm/hugetlb.c~mm-hugetlb-generalize-writes-to-nr_hugepages-fix
+++ a/mm/hugetlb.c
@@ -2260,6 +2260,9 @@ static int hugetlb_sysctl_handler_common
unsigned long tmp = h->max_huge_pages;
int ret;
+ if (!hugepages_supported())
+ return -ENOTSUPP;
+
table->data = &tmp;
table->maxlen = sizeof(unsigned long);
ret = proc_doulongvec_minmax(table, write, buffer, length, ppos);
_
--
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/
