From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
Michael Shaver <jmshaver@gmail.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Avoid that __wait_on_bit_lock() hangs
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:07:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160813170744.GA2868@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ccb421f9-9d0a-6bb6-cd52-8ada311bbe9b@sandisk.com>
Forgot to mention...
On 08/12, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>
> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -1643,7 +1643,12 @@ find_page:
> * wait_on_page_locked is used to avoid unnecessarily
> * serialisations and why it's safe.
> */
> - wait_on_page_locked_killable(page);
> + error = wait_on_page_locked_killable(page);
> + if (error == -EINTR) {
> + put_page(page);
> + goto out;
> + }
> + error = 0;
This change probably makes sense regardless although I'd suggest to
simplify it:
- wait_on_page_locked_killable(page);
+ error = wait_on_page_locked_killable(page);
+ if (unlikely(error))
+ goto readpage_error;
but it looks off-topic. And the changelog looks misleading/wrong.
I do not think this change makes sense in this debugging session,
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-13 17:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-03 16:35 [PATCH] sched: Avoid that __wait_on_bit_lock() hangs Bart Van Assche
2016-08-03 18:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-03 18:56 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-03 21:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-03 21:51 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-04 14:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-04 14:31 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-05 17:41 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-08 10:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-08 14:38 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-08 16:20 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-08 18:31 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-09 17:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-09 18:48 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-09 23:10 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-10 10:45 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-10 16:01 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-10 16:27 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-10 19:58 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-11 17:36 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-12 16:16 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-12 16:27 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-12 22:47 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-13 16:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-15 23:39 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-16 13:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-16 16:54 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-17 17:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-13 17:07 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2016-08-09 23:56 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-10 10:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-10 11:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-04 0:05 ` Bart Van Assche
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160813170744.GA2868@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jmshaver@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox