On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 14:29:22 +1000 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <b...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> The futex code currently attempts to write to user memory within > a pagefault disabled section, and if that fails, tries to fix it > up using get_user_pages(). > > This doesn't work on archs where the dirty and young bits are > maintained by software, since they will gate access permission > in the TLB, and will not be updated by gup(). > > In addition, there's an expectation on some archs that a > spurious write fault triggers a local TLB flush, and that is > missing from the picture as well. > > I decided that adding those "features" to gup() would be too much > for this already too complex function, and instead added a new > simpler fixup_user_fault() which is essentially a wrapper around > handle_mm_fault() which the futex code can call. > > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <b...@kernel.crashing.org> > --- > > Shan, can you test this ? It might not fix the problem um, what problem. There's no description here of the user-visible effects of the bug hence it's hard to work out what kernel version(s) should receive this patch. What kernel version(s) should receive this patch? > since I'm > starting to have the nasty feeling that you are hitting what is > somewhat a subtly different issue or my previous patch should > have worked (but then I might have done a stupid mistake as well) > but let us know anyway. I assume that Shan reported the secret problem so I added the reported-by to the changelog. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
