Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Hi!

Just a quick update

Johannes Weiner wrote on 03.12.2012 20:42:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 09:30:12AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>
>> BTW, I built that kernel without the patch you mentioned in
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/90911/focus=91153
>> ("buffer_heads_over_limit can put kswapd into reclaim, but it's ignored
>> [...]) It looked to me like that patch was only meant for debugging. Let
>> me know if that was wrong. Ohh, and I didn't update to a fresher
>> mainline checkout yet to make sure the base for John's testing didn't
>> change.
> 
> Ah, yes, the ApplyPatch is commented out.
> 
> I think we want that upstream as well, but it's not critical.
> [...]

Sorry, it had no "Singed-off-by", so I assumed it was just for debugging.

> Not rebasing sounds reasonable to me to verify the patch.  It might be
> worth testing that the final version that will be 3.8 still works for
> John, however, once that is done.  Just to be sure.

Just to be sure, I yesterday built a rc8 kernel with the patch
referenced above and the one that is not yet merged (these two, to be
precise: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/90911/focus=91153
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/90911/focus=91300
; all the others patches my kswap test kernels contained earlier were
afaics merged a few days ago) and mentioned it in the Fedora bug report.
John gave them a try and  in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=866988#c65 reported "No
problems so far.  I'll check back again in ~24hours."

CU, Thorsten
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/