On Wed, 2007-11-07 at 14:56 +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
quoted text
> On (05/11/07 14:46), Christoph Lameter didst pronounce:
> > On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > 
> > > The grow_dev_page() pages should be reclaimable even though migration
> > > is not supported for those pages? They were marked movable as it was
> > > useful for lumpy reclaim taking back pages for hugepage allocations and
> > > the like. Would it make sense for memory unremove to attempt migration
> > > first and reclaim second?
> > 
> > Note that a page is still movable even if there is no file system method 
> > for migration available. In that case the page needs to be cleaned before 
> > it can be moved.
> > 
> 
> Badari, do you know if the pages failed to migrate because they were
> dirty or because the filesystem simply had ownership of the pages and
> wouldn't let them go?

quoted text
>From the debug, it looks like all the buffers are clean and they
have a b_count == 1. So drop_buffers() fails to release the buffer.

Thanks,
Badari

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html