Re: [PATCH 19/34] m68k: handle pgtable_page_ctor() fail

[Kirill A. Shutemov]

Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov
> > <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  arch/m68k/include/asm/motorola_pgalloc.h | 5 ++++-
> > >  arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3_pgalloc.h     | 5 ++++-
> > >  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/m68k/include/asm/motorola_pgalloc.h b/arch/m68k/include/asm/motorola_pgalloc.h
> > > index 2f02f264e6..dd254eeb03 100644
> > > --- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/motorola_pgalloc.h
> > > +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/motorola_pgalloc.h
> > > @@ -40,7 +40,10 @@ static inline pgtable_t pte_alloc_one(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addres
> > >         flush_tlb_kernel_page(pte);
> > >         nocache_page(pte);
> >         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > >         kunmap(page);
> > > -       pgtable_page_ctor(page);
> > > +       if (!pgtable_page_ctor(page)) {
> > > +               __free_page(page);
> > 
> > Shouldn't you mark the page cacheable again, like is done in pte_free()?
> 
> Hm. You're right. Updated patch below.

I also noticed that one of pte_alloc_one didn't have the constructor at
all. New patch revision bellow.