On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:03:49PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > If I'm missing something a trace of the exact scenario would help to > clarify your point. Also supposing I'm right, I wouldn't mind if you add a VM_BUG_ON(page_private(page) != entry.val) in the "pte_same == true" path, just to be sure the invariant page_private(page) == pte_to_swp_entry(*page_table) doesn't ever break in a unnoticed way in the future (I think it's unlikely to ever break but a VM_BUG_ON is zero cost in production and it'll clarify the invariant). If instead I'm wrong then just ahead fix it and I'll ack :). -- 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>