[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45E8495A.4080501@shadowen.org>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 15:57:14 +0000
From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@...r.sgi.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] lumpy: isolate_lru_pages wants to specifically take
active or inactive pages
Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
>
>> The caller of isolate_lru_pages specifically knows whether it wants
>> to take either inactive or active pages. Currently we take the
>> state of the LRU page at hand and use that to scan for matching
>> pages in the order sized block. If that page is transiting we
>> can scan for the wrong type. The caller knows what they want and
>> should be telling us. Pass in the required active/inactive state
>> and match against that.
>
> The page cannot be transiting since we hold the lru lock?
As you say it should be gated by lru_lock and we should not expect to
see pages with the wrong type on the list. I would swear that I was
seeing pages on the wrong list there for a bit in testing and mistakenly
thought they were in transition. A quick review at least says thats
false. So I'll reinstate the BUG() and retest to see if I am smoking
crack or there is a bigger bug out there.
-apw
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists