From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 23:55:45 +0100 From: Jamie Lokier Subject: Q. about swap-cache orphans Message-ID: <20000322235545.F31795@pcep-jamie.cern.ch> References: <20000322190532.A7212@pcep-jamie.cern.ch> <20000322223351.G2850@redhat.com> <20000322234531.C31795@pcep-jamie.cern.ch> <20000322224818.J2850@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20000322224818.J2850@redhat.com>; from Stephen C. Tweedie on Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 10:48:18PM +0000 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" Cc: Chuck Lever , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: [This is just a question to help my understanding, not relevant to madvise] Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > If it is the last user of the page --- ie. if PG_SwapCache is set and > the refcount of the page is one --- then it will do so anyway, because > when I added that swap cache code I made sure that zap_page_range() > does a free_page_and_swap_cache() when freeing pages. I.e., zap_page_range makes sure that MADV_DONTNEED won't leave orphan swap-cache pages. > > Doesn't this also result in a swap-cache leak, or are orphan swap-cache > > pages reclaimed eventually? > > The shrink_mmap() page cache reclaimer is able to pick up any orphaned > swap cache pages. But there won't be any orphans, will there? Or do they appear due to async. swapping situations? thanks, -- Jamie -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/