[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160201142446.GB24008@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 15:24:46 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: fix bogus VM_BUG_ON_PAGE() in isolate_lru_page()
On Mon 01-02-16 16:26:08, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> We don't care if there's a tail pages which is not on LRU. We are not
> going to isolate them anyway.
yes we are not going to isolate them but calling this function on a
tail page is wrong in principle, no? PageLRU check is racy outside of
lru_lock so what if we are racing here. I know, highly unlikely but not
impossible. So I am not really sure this is an improvement. When would
we hit this VM_BUG_ON and it wouldn't be a bug or at least suspicious
usage?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists