From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q8E9iMt9059574 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 04:44:22 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de (cantor2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id jbaGIORaYsE788pi (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 02:45:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 10:45:23 +0100 From: Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [PATCH 020/102] xfs: warn if direct reclaim tries to writeback pages Message-ID: <20120914094523.GD11266@suse.de> References: <1345698180-13612-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1345698180-13612-21-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20120827181742.GA13970@infradead.org> <20120905113242.GL11266@suse.de> <50523E20.5000508@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50523E20.5000508@sgi.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Mark Tinguely Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Dave Chinner , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 03:12:16PM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote: > On 09/05/12 06:32, Mel Gorman wrote: > >On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 02:17:42PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >>On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 03:01:38PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > >>>From: Mel Gorman > >>> > >>>Upstream commit: 94054fa3fca1fd78db02cb3d68d5627120f0a1d4 > >>> > >>>Direct reclaim should never writeback pages. For now, handle the > >>>situation and warn about it. Ultimately, this will be a BUG_ON. > >> > >>Is this actually the case on 3.0-stable? > >> > > > >No, it is not. AFAIK, 3.0-stable does not contain [ee72886d: mm: vmscan: > >do not writeback filesystem pages in direct reclaim] which is the absolute > >minimum required for commit [94054fa3: xfs: warn if direct reclaim tries > >to writeback pages] to make sense. > > > > I hit this warning testing on a linux-30.42 with a x86_64. > Just to be clear, this was linux 3.0.42 with this series of patches applied on top, right? > WARNING: at fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c:961 xfs_vm_writepage+0x63c/0x6a0() > Hardware name: S2721-533 Thunder i7501 Pro > Modules linked in: ext4 jbd2 crc16 > Pid: 12122, comm: cp Not tainted 3.0.42 #2 I ask because on 3.0.42 this warning is not present. This patch should not be merged to 3.0-stable. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs