On pon, 2013-10-07 at 15:03 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 17:25:41 +0200 Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <k.kozlow...@samsung.com> wrote:
>
> > During swapoff the frontswap_map was NULL-ified before calling
> > frontswap_invalidate_area(). However the frontswap_invalidate_area()
> > exits early if frontswap_map is NULL. Invalidate was never called during
> > swapoff.
> >
> > This patch moves frontswap_map_set() in swapoff just after calling
> > frontswap_invalidate_area() so outside of locks
> > (swap_lock and swap_info_struct->lock). This shouldn't be a problem as
> > during swapon the frontswap_map_set() is called also outside of any
> > locks.
> >
>
> Ahem. So there's a bunch of code in __frontswap_invalidate_area()
> which hasn't ever been executed and nobody noticed it. So perhaps that
> code isn't actually needed?
>
> More seriously, this patch looks like it enables code which hasn't been
> used or tested before. How well tested was this?
>
> Are there any runtime-visible effects from this change?
I tested zswap on x86 and x86-64 and there was no difference. This is
good as there shouldn't be visible anything because swapoff is unusing
all pages anyway:
try_to_unuse(type, false, 0); /* force all pages to be unused */
I haven't tested other frontswap users.
Best regards,
Krzysztof Kozlowski
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
