Re: [PATCH 4/9] tmpfs: allow filepage alongside swappage

In message <[email protected]>, Hugh Dickins writes:

>  redirty:
>  	set_page_dirty(page);
> -	return AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE;	/* Return with the page locked */
> +	if (wbc->for_reclaim)
> +		return AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE;	/* Return with page locked */
> +	unlock_page(page);
> +	return 0;

Just curious, but didn't you (or someone else) mention that they wanted to
do away with AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE entirely?  If these patches are for
2.6.25, would that be the right time?

Erez.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH 4/9] tmpfs: allow filepage alongside swappage
    • From: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH 4/9] tmpfs: allow filepage alongside swappage
    • From: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Handle i_size > s_maxbytes gracefully
• Next by Date: Re: RFC: permit link(2) to work across --bind mounts ?
• Previous by thread: [PATCH 4/9] tmpfs: allow filepage alongside swappage
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 4/9] tmpfs: allow filepage alongside swappage
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]