From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from snowcrash.cymru.net (snowcrash.cymru.net [163.164.160.3]) by kvack.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA07343 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:29:52 -0500 Message-Id: From: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox) Subject: Re: BUG: deadlock in swap lockmap handling Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 22:24:38 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: from "Andrea Arcangeli" at Jan 18, 99 09:26:05 pm Content-Type: text Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: andrea@e-mind.com Cc: Zlatko.Calusic@CARNet.hr, sct@redhat.com, torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu List-ID: > I think it will not harm too much because the window is not too big (but > not small) and because usually one of the process not yet deadlocked will > generate IO and will wakeup also the deadlocked process at I/O > completation time. A very lazy ;) but at the same time obviosly right Take it from me - the scenario you give will cause deadlocks and problems. There were other "generating an I/O would have cleaned up" type problems in 2.0.x < .35/6. They caused a lot of grief with installers where that I/O assumption is not true. Another classic case is large fsck's during boot up. So its not just a trivial irrelevant fix. -- This is a majordomo managed list. To unsubscribe, send a message with the body 'unsubscribe linux-mm me@address' to: majordomo@kvack.org