From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx203.postini.com [74.125.245.203]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7F3406B004D for ; Sun, 3 Jun 2012 14:31:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2012 14:31:39 -0400 From: Dave Jones Subject: Re: WARNING: at mm/page-writeback.c:1990 __set_page_dirty_nobuffers+0x13a/0x170() Message-ID: <20120603183139.GA1061@redhat.com> References: <20120531005739.GA4532@redhat.com> <20120601023107.GA19445@redhat.com> <20120601161205.GA1918@redhat.com> <20120601171606.GA3794@redhat.com> <20120603181548.GA306@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Hugh Dickins , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Kyungmin Park , Marek Szyprowski , Mel Gorman , Minchan Kim , Rik van Riel , Andrew Morton , Cong Wang , Markus Trippelsdorf , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 11:23:29AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Dave Jones wrote: > > > > Things aren't happy with that patch at all. > > Yeah, at this point I think we need to just revert the compaction changes. > > Guys, what's the minimal set of commits to revert? That clearly buggy > "rescue_unmovable_pageblock()" function was introduced by commit > 5ceb9ce6fe94, but is that actually involved with the particular bug? > That commit seems to revert cleanly still, but is that sufficient or > does it even matter? I'l rerun the test with that (and Hugh's last patch) backed out, and see if that makes any difference. Dave -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org