On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 09:00:34AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 01/09/2017 08:57 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 08:21:25AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >> On 01/09/2017 01:19 AM, Balbir Singh wrote:
> >>>> + /*
> >>>> + * This should never happen ! Page from ZONE_DEVICE always must have an
> >>>> + * active refcount. Complain about it and try to restore the refcount.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> + if (is_zone_device_page(page)) {
> >>>> + VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_zone_device_page(page), page);
> >>> This can be VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(1, page), hopefully the compiler does the right thing
> >>> here. I suspect this should be a BUG_ON, independent of CONFIG_DEBUG_VM
> >> BUG_ON() means "kill the machine dead". Do we really want a guaranteed
> >> dead machine if someone screws up their refcounting?
> > VM_BUG_ON_PAGE ok with you ? It is just a safety net, i can simply drop that
> > patch if people have too much feeling about it.
>
> Enough distros turn on DEBUG_VM that there's basically no difference
> between VM_BUG_ON() and BUG_ON().
>
> I also think it would be much nicer if you buried the check in the
> allocator in a slow path somewhere instead of sticking it in one of the
> hottest paths in the whole kernel.
Well i will just drop that patch then. The point was to catch error
early on before anything happen. This is just a safety net so not
fundamental.
Cheers,
Jérôme
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>