Looks correct to me - thanks for the fix!
Reviewed-by: Axel Rasmussen
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 9:41 AM Ryan Roberts wrote:
>
> On 22/09/2023 17:14, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 12:58:04PM +0100, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> >> When called with a swap entry that does not embed a PFN (e
On 22/09/2023 17:14, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 12:58:04PM +0100, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> When called with a swap entry that does not embed a PFN (e.g.
>> PTE_MARKER_POISONED or PTE_MARKER_UFFD_WP), the previous implementation
>> of set_huge_pte_at() would either cause a BUG() to f
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 12:58:04PM +0100, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> When called with a swap entry that does not embed a PFN (e.g.
> PTE_MARKER_POISONED or PTE_MARKER_UFFD_WP), the previous implementation
> of set_huge_pte_at() would either cause a BUG() to fire (if
> CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled) or caus
When called with a swap entry that does not embed a PFN (e.g.
PTE_MARKER_POISONED or PTE_MARKER_UFFD_WP), the previous implementation
of set_huge_pte_at() would either cause a BUG() to fire (if
CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled) or cause a dereference of an invalid address
and subsequent panic.
arm64's h
