From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759382AbZDIHzx (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2009 03:55:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755127AbZDIHzo (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2009 03:55:44 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:48618 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752912AbZDIHzn (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2009 03:55:43 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 09:58:05 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Andi Kleen Cc: Chris Mason , hugh@veritas.com, npiggin@suse.de, riel@redhat.com, lee.schermerhorn@hp.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [13/16] POISON: The high level memory error handler in the VM II Message-ID: <20090409075805.GG14687@one.firstfloor.org> References: <20090407509.382219156@firstfloor.org> <20090407151010.E72A91D0471@basil.firstfloor.org> <1239210239.28688.15.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <20090409072949.GF14687@one.firstfloor.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090409072949.GF14687@one.firstfloor.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Double checked the try_to_release_page logic. My assumption was that the writeback case could never trigger, because during write back the page should be locked and so it's excluded with the earlier lock_page_nosync(). Is that a correct assumption? -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1E975F0001 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2009 03:54:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 09:58:05 +0200 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH] [13/16] POISON: The high level memory error handler in the VM II Message-ID: <20090409075805.GG14687@one.firstfloor.org> References: <20090407509.382219156@firstfloor.org> <20090407151010.E72A91D0471@basil.firstfloor.org> <1239210239.28688.15.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <20090409072949.GF14687@one.firstfloor.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090409072949.GF14687@one.firstfloor.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Andi Kleen Cc: Chris Mason , hugh@veritas.com, npiggin@suse.de, riel@redhat.com, lee.schermerhorn@hp.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org List-ID: Double checked the try_to_release_page logic. My assumption was that the writeback case could never trigger, because during write back the page should be locked and so it's excluded with the earlier lock_page_nosync(). Is that a correct assumption? -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org