Re: [PATCH] [5/16] POISON: Add support for poison swap entries

Andi Kleen
2009-04-07T22:23:39Z

On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 05:56:28PM -0400, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 05:11:26PM -0400, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > >
> > > Could you separate the semantic changes to flag checking for migration
> >
> > You mean to try_to_unmap?
>
> I mean the changes to checking the pte contents for a migratable /
> swappable page. Those are significant independent from this patchset and
> would be useful to review independently.

Sorry I'm still not quite sure what you're asking for.

Are you asking about the fault path or about try_to_unmap or some
other path?

And why do you want a separate patchset versus merely a separate patch?
(afaik the patches to generic code are already pretty separated)

I don't really change the semantics of the migration or swap code itself
for example. At least not consciously. If I did that would be a bug.

e.g. the changes to try_to_unmap are two stages:
- add flags/action code. Everything should still do the same, just
the flags are passed around differently.
- add a check for an already poisoned page and insert a poison
swap entry for those

-Andi
--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.