Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030264AbWAISyG (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2006 13:54:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030259AbWAISyG (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2006 13:54:06 -0500 Received: from solarneutrino.net ([66.199.224.43]:18692 "EHLO tau.solarneutrino.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030251AbWAISyB (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2006 13:54:01 -0500 Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 13:53:50 -0500 To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Linus Torvalds , Kai Makisara , James Bottomley , Nick Piggin , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, ryan@tau.solarneutrino.net Subject: Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related? Message-ID: <20060109185350.GG283@tau.solarneutrino.net> References: <1134705703.3906.1.camel@mulgrave> <20051226234238.GA28037@tau.solarneutrino.net> <20060104172727.GA320@tau.solarneutrino.net> <20060105201249.GB1795@tau.solarneutrino.net> <20060109033149.GC283@tau.solarneutrino.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i From: Ryan Richter Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1692 Lines: 35 On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 09:44:26AM +0000, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Sun, 8 Jan 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > Code like that should use "set_page_dirty()", which does the appropriate > > callbacks to the filesystem for that page. I wonder if the bug is simply > > because the ST code just sets the dirty bit without telling anybody else > > about it... > > Yes, it should be using set_page_dirty_lock(), and that is already known > about (I have patches for this and similar sg.c, but the sg.c case is > tougher and not yet finished); but entirely irrelevant to Ryan's case. > > Quite apart from the fact that he's doing backups to tape (not dirtying > the memory from this driver), you'll find that it even passes dirty 0 > when reading into the memory (another bug; whereas sg.c conversely says > it's always dirtying when it isn't). So there's no point in Ryan > fiddling with the SetPageDirty. One thing I forgot to mention was that 2.6.11.3 had the problem too when I reverted to it. I remember now that the person who made the debian bug report for this said it only happened with a 64-bit userspace - and I switched from a 32- to 64-bit userspace when I did 2.6.11 -> 2.6.14 (and I'm too lazy to switch back). To get the backups back, I just ran a recent kernel with try_direct_io=0. If there's nothing further for me to test at this time, I guess I'll go back to doing that until there's something to try. Is that OK? -ryan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/