From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 105686B004D for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:28:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.73]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id nAJ6SfKi017691 for (envelope-from kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com); Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:28:41 +0900 Received: from smail (m3 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 839C845DE4D for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:28:41 +0900 (JST) Received: from s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.93]) by m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5883345DE4F for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:28:41 +0900 (JST) Received: from s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C6451DB8042 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:28:41 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.104]) by s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDAF31DB803E for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:28:40 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH] [for mmotm-1113] mm: Simplify try_to_unmap_one() In-Reply-To: References: <20091119144657.3E34.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-Id: <20091119152748.3E37.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:28:40 +0900 (JST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Vincent Li Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-mm List-ID: > > > On Thu, 19 Nov 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > > > > > Hi KOSAKI, > > > > > > Thank you for the comment, I am still little confused with the last > > > sentence. > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Nov 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > + /* > > > > + * We need mmap_sem locking, Otherwise VM_LOCKED check makes > > > > + * unstable result and race. Plus, We can't wait here because > > > > + * we now hold anon_vma->lock or mapping->i_mmap_lock. > > > > + * If trylock failed, The page remain evictable lru and > > > > + * retry to more unevictable lru by later vmscan. > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I am having > > > trouble to undestand it. Yeah, I should read more code, but the sentence > > > itself make me confused :). > > > > Um, this is wrong. > > Probably, It should be > > > > retry to move unevictable lru later. > > > > Do you agree this? > > Ah, let's see if I understand you correctly, if trylock failed, the page > remain in evictable lru and later vmscan could retry to move the page to > unevictable lru if the page is actually mlocked? Ah, your sentence is better. can you please change code itself? -- 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-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org