On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 03:28:07PM -0600, Alex Thorlton wrote: > > If the warning added by that patch does *not* trigger than can you also > > test this patch? It removes the barriers which should not be necessary > > and takes a reference tot he page before waiting on the lock. The > > previous version did not take the reference because otherwise the > > WARN_ON could not distinguish between a migration waiter and a surprise > > gup. > > Sorry for the delay; been a bit busy. I tested both of these patches on > top of this one (separately, of course): > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg63919.html > > I think that's the one you were referring to, if not send me a pointer > to the correct one and I'll give it another shot. Both patches still > segfaulted, so it doesn't appear that either of these solved the > problem. I see. Does THP have to be enabled or does it segfault even with THP disabled? -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- 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>