Re: [PATCH] more ZERO_PAGE handling ( was 2.6.24 regression: deadlock on coredump of big process)

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Nick Piggin
Date: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - 9:46 pm

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 01:25:16PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:

Ah, yes I stupidly missed this detail of follow_page. Definitely your
patch is a good idea, and I think it would be a good idea even when
we still had ZERO_PAGE, because it would prevent pagetable clearing
from having to do extra teardown work here.

Good catch, and I agree with your patch. Thanks


--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
2.6.24 regression: deadlock on coredump of big process, Tony Battersby, (Mon Apr 28, 8:11 am)
Re: 2.6.24 regression: deadlock on coredump of big process, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Mon Apr 28, 6:00 pm)
Re: 2.6.24 regression: deadlock on coredump of big process, Tony Battersby, (Tue Apr 29, 7:10 am)
[PATCH] more ZERO_PAGE handling ( was 2.6.24 regression: d ..., KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Tue Apr 29, 9:25 pm)
Re: [PATCH] more ZERO_PAGE handling ( was 2.6.24 regressio ..., Nick Piggin, (Tue Apr 29, 9:46 pm)
Re: [PATCH] more ZERO_PAGE handling ( was 2.6.24 regressio ..., KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Tue Apr 29, 10:17 pm)
Re: [PATCH] more ZERO_PAGE handling ( was 2.6.24 regressio ..., KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Tue Apr 29, 10:35 pm)