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

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...>
Cc: Mika <mika.penttila@...>, Tony Battersby <tonyb@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <linux-mm@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>
Date: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 - 2:11 am

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 02:35:42PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:

Don't be sorry. The most important thing is that you found this tricky
problem. That's very good work IMO!


Just a small nitpick: I guess you don't need this FOLL_WRITE test because
null_or_zeropage will test FOLL_ANON which implies !FOLL_WRITE. It should give
slightly smaller code.

Otherwise, looks good to me:

Acked-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>


--
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, 11:11 am)
Re: 2.6.24 regression: deadlock on coredump of big process, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Mon Apr 28, 9:00 pm)
Re: 2.6.24 regression: deadlock on coredump of big process, Tony Battersby, (Tue Apr 29, 10:10 am)
[PATCH] more ZERO_PAGE handling ( was 2.6.24 regression: dea..., KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Wed Apr 30, 12:25 am)
Re: [PATCH] more ZERO_PAGE handling ( was 2.6.24 regression:..., KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Wed Apr 30, 1:17 am)
Re: [PATCH] more ZERO_PAGE handling ( was 2.6.24 regression:..., KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Wed Apr 30, 1:35 am)
Re: [PATCH] more ZERO_PAGE handling ( was 2.6.24 regression:..., Nick Piggin, (Wed Apr 30, 2:11 am)
Re: [PATCH] more ZERO_PAGE handling ( was 2.6.24 regression:..., KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Tue May 6, 10:14 pm)
Re: [PATCH] more ZERO_PAGE handling ( was 2.6.24 regression:..., KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Tue May 6, 10:27 pm)