From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg0-f71.google.com (mail-pg0-f71.google.com [74.125.83.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 652046B02D0 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2018 18:56:11 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pg0-f71.google.com with SMTP id e12so22757pga.5 for ; Tue, 02 Jan 2018 15:56:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from lgeamrelo11.lge.com (LGEAMRELO11.lge.com. [156.147.23.51]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a14si14365641pgd.623.2018.01.02.15.56.07 for ; Tue, 02 Jan 2018 15:56:08 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 08:56:06 +0900 From: Minchan Kim Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm for mmotm: Revert skip swap cache feture for synchronous device Message-ID: <20180102235606.GA19438@bbox> References: <1514508907-10039-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> <20180102132214.289b725cf00ac07d91e8f60b@linux-foundation.org> <1514932941.4018.12.camel@HansenPartnership.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1514932941.4018.12.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: James Bottomley Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, kernel-team , Christoph Hellwig , Dan Williams , Ross Zwisler , Hugh Dickins , Ilya Dryomov , Jens Axboe , Sergey Senozhatsky , Huang Ying On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 02:42:21PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 13:22 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 09:55:07 +0900 Minchan Kim > > wrote: > > > > > > > > James reported a bug of swap paging-in for his testing and found it > > > at rc5, soon to be -rc5. > > > > > > Although we can fix the specific problem at the moment, it may > > > have other lurkig bugs so want to have one more cycle in -next > > > before merging. > > > > > > This patchset reverts 23c47d2ada9f, 08fa93021d80, 8e31f339295f > > > completely > > > but 79b5f08fa34e partially because the swp_swap_info function that > > > 79b5f08fa34e introduced is used by [1]. > > > > Gets a significant reject in do_swap_page(). Could you please take a > > look, redo against current mainline? > > > > Or not. We had a bug and James fixed it. That's what -rc is > > for. Why not fix the thing and proceed? > > My main worry was lack of testing at -rc5, since the bug could > essentially be excited by pushing pages out to swap and then trying to > access them again ... plus since one serious bug was discovered it > wouldn't be unusual for there to be others. However, because of the > IPT stuff, I think Linus is going to take 4.15 over a couple of extra > -rc releases, so this is less of a problem. Then, Here is right fix patch against current mainline.