From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2000 15:14:40 +0200 (CEST) From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [patch] take 2 Re: PG_swap_entry bug in recent kernels In-Reply-To: <200004080015.RAA04351@google.engr.sgi.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Kanoj Sarcar Cc: Ben LaHaise , riel@nl.linux.org, Linus Torvalds , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, 7 Apr 2000, Kanoj Sarcar wrote: >> BTW, swap_out() always used the same locking order that I added to swapoff >> so if my patch is wrong, swap_out() is always been wrong as well ;). > >Not sure what you mean ... swap_out never grabbed the mmap_sem/page_table_lock >before (in 2.2. too). In 2.2.x page_table_lock wasn't necessary because we was holding the big kernel lock. In 2.3.x vmlist_*_lock is alias to spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock) and swap_out isn't even calling the spin_lock explicitly but it's doing what the fixed swapoff does. Andrea -- 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/