From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756655Ab3EVSVn (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2013 14:21:43 -0400 Received: from www.meduna.org ([92.240.244.38]:57212 "EHLO meduna.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752265Ab3EVSVl (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2013 14:21:41 -0400 Message-ID: <519D0CAB.7020800@meduna.org> Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 20:21:31 +0200 From: Stanislav Meduna User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steven Rostedt CC: Rik van Riel , Linus Torvalds , "linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , the arch/x86 maintainers , Hai Huang Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fix up a spurious page fault whenever it happens References: <5195ED8B.7060002@meduna.org> <1369183168.6828.168.camel@gandalf.local.home> <519CBB30.3060200@redhat.com> <20130522134111.33a695c5@cuia.bos.redhat.com> <519D08B0.8050707@meduna.org> <1369246316.6828.176.camel@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <1369246316.6828.176.camel@gandalf.local.home> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-User: stano@meduna.org X-Authenticator: dovecot_plain X-Spam-Score: -6.9 X-Spam-Score-Int: -68 X-Exim-Version: 4.72 (build at 25-Oct-2012 18:35:58) X-Date: 2013-05-22 20:21:37 X-Connected-IP: 95.105.165.4:4622 X-Message-Linecount: 37 X-Body-Linecount: 17 X-Message-Size: 1710 X-Body-Size: 490 X-Received-Count: 1 X-Recipient-Count: 10 X-Local-Recipient-Count: 10 X-Local-Recipient-Defer-Count: 0 X-Local-Recipient-Fail-Count: 0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 22.05.2013 20:11, Steven Rostedt wrote: > Did you apply both patches? Without the first one, this one is > meaningless. Sure. BTW, back when I tried to pinpoint it I also tried adding flush_tlb_page(vma, address) at the beginning of handle_pte_fault, which as I read should be basically the same. It did not not change anything. I did mention it some in some previous mail but forgot to include it again in the summary - sorry :/ -- Stano