From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] vmscan: Synchrounous lumpy reclaim use lock_page() instead trylock_page() Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 13:13:22 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <20100909131211.C93C.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20100909120448.58acc9a6.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100909121547.2e69735a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Mel Gorman , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel List , Rik van Riel , Johannes Weiner , Minchan Kim , Wu Fengguang , Andrea Arcangeli , Dave Chinner , Chris Mason , Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100909121547.2e69735a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org > On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 12:04:48 +0900 > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > > On Mon, 6 Sep 2010 11:47:28 +0100 > > Mel Gorman wrote: > > > > > From: KOSAKI Motohiro > > > > > > With synchrounous lumpy reclaim, there is no reason to give up to reclaim > > > pages even if page is locked. This patch uses lock_page() instead of > > > trylock_page() in this case. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro > > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman > > > > Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > > > Ah......but can't this change cause dead lock ?? Yes, this patch is purely crappy. please drop. I guess I was poisoned by poisonous mushroom of Mario Bros. -- 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