From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:50622 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752295AbcF1N2m (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2016 09:28:42 -0400 Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 15:28:39 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Dave Chinner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com, rpeterso@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: iomap infrastructure and multipage writes V5 Message-ID: <20160628132839.GA30892@lst.de> References: <1464792297-13185-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20160628002649.GI12670@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160628002649.GI12670@dastard> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:26:49AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > Christoph, it look slike there's an ENOSPC+ENOMEM behavioural regression here. > generic/224 on my 1p/1GB RAM VM using a 1k lock size filesystem has > significantly different behaviour once ENOSPC is hit withi this patchset. Works fine on my 1k test setup with 4 CPUs and 2GB RAM. 1 CPU and 1GB RAM runs into the OOM killer, although I haven't checked if that was the case with the old code as well. I'll look into this more later today or tomorrow.