Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 15 Nov 2005 08:38:21 -0800 (PST) | | From | Christoph Lameter <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/5] Swap Migration V5: LRU operations |
| |
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > +int isolate_lru_page(struct page *page) > > +{ > > + int rc = 0; > > + struct zone *zone = page_zone(page); > > + > > +redo: > > + spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock); > > + rc = __isolate_lru_page(zone, page); > > + spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock); > > + if (rc == 0) { > > + /* > > + * Maybe this page is still waiting for a cpu to drain it > > + * from one of the lru lists? > > + */ > > + smp_call_function(&lru_add_drain_per_cpu, NULL, 0 , 1); > > lru_add_drain() ends up doing spin_unlock_irq(), so we'll enable interrupts > within the smp_call_function() handler. Is that legal on all > architectures?
isolate_lru_pages() is only called within a process context in the swap migration patches. The hotplug folks may have to address this if they want to isolate pages from interrupts etc.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |