Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 13 May 2001 14:55:54 -0300 (BRST) | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: page_launder() bug |
| |
On Sun, 13 May 2001, David S. Miller wrote: > Rik van Riel writes: > > On Tue, 8 May 2001, David S. Miller wrote: > > > Nice. Now the only bit left is moving the referenced bit > > > checking and/or state into writepage as well. This is still > > > part of the plan right? > > > > Why the hell would we want this ? > > Because if it's a dead swap page the referenced bit is meaningless > and we should just kill off the page immediately.
Then I'd rather check this in a visible place in page_launder() itself. Granted, this is a special case, but I don't think this one is worth obfuscating the code for...
regards,
Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...
http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy)
- 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/
|  |