Re: page_launder() bug

Rik van Riel (riel@conectiva.com.br)
Sun, 13 May 2001 14:55:54 -0300 (BRST)

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/