On Wed, 2007-11-07 at 14:56 +0000, Mel Gorman wrote: > 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? >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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
