[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111114122319.GC2513@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 13:23:20 +0100
From: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] mm: more intensive memory corruption debug
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 02:29:53PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > --- a/mm/Kconfig.debug
> > +++ b/mm/Kconfig.debug
> > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ config DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
> > depends on !HIBERNATION || ARCH_SUPPORTS_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC && !PPC && !SPARC
> > depends on !KMEMCHECK
> > select PAGE_POISONING if !ARCH_SUPPORTS_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
> > + select WANT_PAGE_DEBUG_FLAGS
>
> Why not add PAGE_CORRUPT (or preferably PAGE_GUARD) in the same pattern
> as PAGE_POISONING already uses?
Additional CONFIG_PAGE_GUARD variable, would be duplicate of
CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC. PAGE_POISONING is needed for compile
another file, no such thing would be needed with PAGE_GUARD,
hence I'm consider such variable useless.
Stanislaw
--
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