On Sat, 2005-01-08 at 16:00 +0000, Hugh Dickins wrote:

> You're right, and yes, I could then reproduce it.  Looks like I'd only
> been testing on 3levels (HIGHMEM64G), and this only happens on 2levels.
> 
> Patch below, please verify it fixes your problems.  And please, could
> someone else check I haven't screwed up swapoff on 4levels (x86_64)?
> From the likeness of the code at all levels I'd expect it to be fine,
> but there's nothing like a real test - thanks...

The patch fixes the problem completely here.
swapoff after running the memory hog works as expected.
and swapoff after suspend to disk and resume also works fine.

Thanks for tracking this down and fixing it.

-- 
/Martin