Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Ok, pre-5 should have all the same places you found already fixed, but
> please do give it some heavy-duty testing to make sure there isn't
> anything hidden..
I've beaten on it fairly heavily with the BUG in there as you suggested,
with no problems.
This kernel even seem
On Thu, 28 Dec 2000, Daniel Phillips wrote:
>
> OK, I see you just posted -pre5 while I was making the patch, but here
> it is anyway, as a cross-check.
Ok, pre-5 should have all the same places you found already fixed, but
please do give it some heavy-duty testing to make sure there isn't
any
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> We don't want to lose dirty bits by mistake. The only cases where it's ok
> to clear the dirty bit is when we truncate a page completely (so it won't
> be needed and obviously really shouldn't be written out) and when we've
> lost the last user of a swap cache entry.
>
> A
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> No, I'd much rather have
>
> if (PageDirty(page)) BUG();
>
> there, and then have the free_swap_cache code clear the dirty bit.
>
> We don't want to lose dirty bits by mistake. The only cases where it's ok
> to clear the dirty bit is when we truncate a page compl
On Thu, 28 Dec 2000, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> [in vmscan.c]
> > Between line 573 and 594 the page can have 1 user and be unlocked, so it
> > can be removed by invalidate_inode_pages, and the mapping will be
> > cleared here:
> > http://innominate.org/~graichen/projects/lxr/source/mm/filemap.c?v
5 matches
Mail list logo
