Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 24 Dec 2000 21:07:40 +0100 | From | Daniel Phillips <> | Subject | Re: innd mmap bug in 2.4.0-test12 |
| |
Linus Torvalds wrote: > Hmm.. I wonder if such a dirty page might have been moved to the > "inactive_clean" list some way? It shouldn't really be there, as the page > had users, but if it gets on that list we'd not have tested the dirty bit. > > Marco, would you mind changing the test in reclaim_page(), somewheer > around line mm/vmscan.c:487 that says: > > /* The page is dirty, or locked, move to inactive_dirty list. */ > if (page->buffers || TryLockPage(page)) { > ... > > and change the test to > > if (page->buffers || PageDirty(page) || TryLockPage(page)) { > > instead? Ie ad the test for "PageDirty(page)"
Good point. Up until recently the page dirty bit wasn't actually being set anywhere and page->buffers was acting as kind of a surrogate dirty bit - page_launder would call try_to_free_buffers which would find the dirty buffers and fail out, but start io first
It looks like PG_dirty is now being used only for swap_cache pages, and not for buffer cache and page cache pages, is that correct?
-- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |