On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:05:21AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > No, remap_swapcache could just be called "remap". If it's 0, it's > > considered unsafe to remap the page. > > Call this "can_remap"? > can_do - ba dum tisch. While you are looking though, maybe you can confirm something for me. 1. Is leaving a migration PTE like this behind reasonable? (I think yes particularly as the page was already unmapped so it's not a new fault incurred) 2. Is the BUG_ON check in include/linux/swapops.h#migration_entry_to_page() now wrong? (I think yes, but I'm not sure and I'm having trouble verifying it) Thanks. -- Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>