All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH next] mm: make swapoff more robust against soft dirty
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 17:09:02 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160110140902.GA31017@uranus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1601091656491.9808@eggly.anvils>

On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 04:59:42PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Both s390 and powerpc have hit the issue of swapoff hanging, when
> CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_SOFT_DIRTY and CONFIG_MEM_SOFT_DIRTY ifdefs were
> not quite as x86_64 had them.  I think it would be much clearer if
> HAVE_ARCH_SOFT_DIRTY was just a Kconfig option set by architectures
> to determine whether the MEM_SOFT_DIRTY option should be offered,
> and the actual code depend upon CONFIG_MEM_SOFT_DIRTY alone.
> 
> But won't embark on that change myself: instead make swapoff more
> robust, by using pte_swp_clear_soft_dirty() on each pte it encounters,
> without an explicit #ifdef CONFIG_MEM_SOFT_DIRTY.  That being a no-op,
> whether the bit in question is defined as 0 or the asm-generic fallback
> is used, unless soft dirty is fully turned on.
> 
> Why "maybe" in maybe_same_pte()?  Rename it pte_same_as_swp().
>
> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Acked-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@openvz.org>

Thanks a lot, Hugh!

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH next] mm: make swapoff more robust against soft dirty
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 17:09:02 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160110140902.GA31017@uranus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1601091656491.9808@eggly.anvils>

On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 04:59:42PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Both s390 and powerpc have hit the issue of swapoff hanging, when
> CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_SOFT_DIRTY and CONFIG_MEM_SOFT_DIRTY ifdefs were
> not quite as x86_64 had them.  I think it would be much clearer if
> HAVE_ARCH_SOFT_DIRTY was just a Kconfig option set by architectures
> to determine whether the MEM_SOFT_DIRTY option should be offered,
> and the actual code depend upon CONFIG_MEM_SOFT_DIRTY alone.
> 
> But won't embark on that change myself: instead make swapoff more
> robust, by using pte_swp_clear_soft_dirty() on each pte it encounters,
> without an explicit #ifdef CONFIG_MEM_SOFT_DIRTY.  That being a no-op,
> whether the bit in question is defined as 0 or the asm-generic fallback
> is used, unless soft dirty is fully turned on.
> 
> Why "maybe" in maybe_same_pte()?  Rename it pte_same_as_swp().
>
> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Acked-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@openvz.org>

Thanks a lot, Hugh!

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2016-01-10 14:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-01-10  0:54 [PATCH next] powerpc/mm: fix _PAGE_SWP_SOFT_DIRTY breaking swapoff Hugh Dickins
2016-01-10  0:54 ` Hugh Dickins
2016-01-10  0:59 ` [PATCH next] mm: make swapoff more robust against soft dirty Hugh Dickins
2016-01-10  0:59   ` Hugh Dickins
2016-01-10 14:09   ` Cyrill Gorcunov [this message]
2016-01-10 14:09     ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2016-01-11  5:39   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-01-11  5:39     ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-01-10 14:07 ` [PATCH next] powerpc/mm: fix _PAGE_SWP_SOFT_DIRTY breaking swapoff Cyrill Gorcunov
2016-01-10 14:07   ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2016-01-11  5:43 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-01-11  5:43   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-01-11  6:05   ` Hugh Dickins
2016-01-11  6:05     ` Hugh Dickins
2016-01-11  6:31     ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-01-11  6:31       ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-01-11  7:33       ` Hugh Dickins
2016-01-11  7:33         ` Hugh Dickins
2016-01-11 16:04 ` Laurent Dufour
2016-01-11 16:04   ` Laurent Dufour
2016-01-12 12:32 ` [next] " Michael Ellerman
2016-01-12 12:32   ` Michael Ellerman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160110140902.GA31017@uranus \
    --to=gorcunov@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.