From 41d78ba55037468e6c86c53e3076d1a74841de39 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Hugh Dickins Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:52:58 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] [PATCH] compound page: use page[1].lru If a compound page has its own put_page_testzero destructor (the only current example is free_huge_page), that is noted in page[1].mapping of the compound page. But that's rather a poor place to keep it: functions which call set_page_dirty_lock after get_user_pages (e.g. Infiniband's __ib_umem_release) ought to be checking first, otherwise set_page_dirty is liable to crash on what's not the address of a struct address_space. And now I'm about to make that worse: it turns out that every compound page needs a destructor, so we can no longer rely on hugetlb pages going their own special way, to avoid further problems of page->mapping reuse. For example, not many people know that: on 50% of i386 -Os builds, the first tail page of a compound page purports to be PageAnon (when its destructor has an odd address), which surprises page_add_file_rmap. Keep the compound page destructor in page[1].lru.next instead. And to free up the common pairing of mapping and index, also move compound page order from index to lru.prev. Slab reuses page->lru too: but if we ever need slab to use compound pages, it can easily stack its use above this. (akpm: decoded version of the above: the tail pages of a compound page now have ->mapping==NULL, so there's no need for the set_page_dirty[_lock]() caller to check that they're not compund pages before doing the dirty). Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds --- Reading git-format-patch failed