> On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 12:04:48 +0900 > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, 6 Sep 2010 11:47:28 +0100 > > Mel Gorman <mel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > With synchrounous lumpy reclaim, there is no reason to give up to reclaim > > > pages even if page is locked. This patch uses lock_page() instead of > > > trylock_page() in this case. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Ah......but can't this change cause dead lock ?? Yes, this patch is purely crappy. please drop. I guess I was poisoned by poisonous mushroom of Mario Bros. -- 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
