From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 06:10:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 06:10:44 -0400 Received: from [195.157.147.30] ([195.157.147.30]:16147 "HELO pookie.dev.sportingbet.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 06:10:33 -0400 Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:12:29 +0100 From: Sean Hunter To: Alan Cox Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: /proc/meminfo swap counter wraparound in 2.2 Message-ID: <20010912111229.P6126@dev.sportingbet.com> Mail-Followup-To: Sean Hunter , Alan Cox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20010912105151.L6126@dev.sportingbet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk on Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 11:07:55AM +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 11:07:55AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > I would be amazed if this bug were not also in the main 2.2.x tree. Is a fix > > likely or even possible in 2.2 ? > > No fix is planned for 2.2 > OK, thanks. I'm a little reluctant to move this box to 2.4 yet (before Monday we had almost a year's uptime out of it- frequent reboots are frowned upon), but looking at the 2.4 source, the relevant bits of fs/proc/array.c and include/linux/kernel.h look exactly the same, so the problem could be there as well. Am I being dumb? Sean