Re: [PATCH] rmap 24 pte_young first

From: Hugh Dickins
Date: Sat May 08 2004 - 17:41:33 EST

rmap 25 of course

On Sat, 8 May 2004, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, May 08, 2004 at 10:56:26PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> >
> > - if (ptep_test_and_clear_young(pte))
> > + if (pte_young(*pte) && ptep_test_and_clear_young(pte))
> stupid question - shouldn't the pte_young check simply move to
> the beginning of ptep_test_and_clear_young?

I don't think that would be a good idea. We're used to those
test_and_clear operations being atomic, putting an initial non-atomic
test inside would make it fundamentally non-atomic. We know here that
it's not the end of the world if we miss a racing transition of the
young bit, but it wouldn't be good to hide and force that on others.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at