Re: page_launder() bug

Marcelo Tosatti
2001-05-08T03:19:14Z

On Mon, 7 May 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> > To divert people's brains to what the intent was :-)
>
> I can see the intent.
>
> I can also see that the code doesn't match up to the intent.
>
> I call that a bug. You don't. Fine.
>
> But that code isn't coming anywhere _close_ to my tree until the two
> match. And I stand by my assertion that it should be reverted from Alans
> tree too.

I was wrong. The patch is indeed buggy because of the __GFP_IO thing.

So what about moving the check for a dead swap cache page from
swap_writepage() to page_launder() (+ PageSwapCache() check) just before
the "if (!launder_loop)" ?

Yes, its ugly special casing. Any other suggestion ?