Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754893AbXKQVa4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Nov 2007 16:30:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752433AbXKQVas (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Nov 2007 16:30:48 -0500 Received: from extu-mxob-1.symantec.com ([216.10.194.28]:35955 "EHLO extu-mxob-1.symantec.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752193AbXKQVaq (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Nov 2007 16:30:46 -0500 Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 21:24:01 +0000 (GMT) From: Hugh Dickins X-X-Sender: hugh@blonde.wat.veritas.com To: Erez Zadok cc: Dave Hansen , Pekka Enberg , Ryan Finnie , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, cjwatson@ubuntu.com, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: msync(2) bug(?), returns AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE to userland In-Reply-To: <200711131018.lADAInYN017695@agora.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu> Message-ID: References: <200711131018.lADAInYN017695@agora.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2253 Lines: 57 On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Erez Zadok wrote: > > I posted all of these patches just now. You're CC'ed. Hopefully Andrew can > pull from my unionfs.git branch soon. > > You also reported in your previous emails some hangs/oopses while doing make > -j 20 in unionfs on top of a single tmpfs, using -mm. After several days, > I've not been able to reproduce this w/ my latest set of patches. If you > can send me your .config and the specs on the h/w you're using (cpus, mem, > etc.), I'll see if I can find something similar to it on my end and run the > same tests. I'm glad to report that this unionfs, not the one in 2.6.24-rc2-mm1 but the one including those 9 patches you posted, now gets through my testing with tmpfs without a problem. I do still get occasional "unionfs: new lower inode mtime (bindex=0, name=)" messages, but nothing worse seen yet: a big improvement. I deceived myself for a while that the danger of shmem_writepage hitting its BUG_ON(entry->val) was dealt with too; but that's wrong, I must go back to working out an escape from that one (despite never seeing it). I did think you could clean up the doubled set_page_dirtys, but it's of no consequence. Hugh --- 2.6.24-rc2-mm1+9/fs/unionfs/mmap.c 2007-11-17 12:23:30.000000000 +0000 +++ linux/fs/unionfs/mmap.c 2007-11-17 20:22:29.000000000 +0000 @@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ static int unionfs_writepage(struct page copy_highpage(lower_page, page); flush_dcache_page(lower_page); SetPageUptodate(lower_page); + set_page_dirty(lower_page); /* * Call lower writepage (expects locked page). However, if we are @@ -66,12 +67,11 @@ static int unionfs_writepage(struct page * success. */ if (wbc->for_reclaim) { - set_page_dirty(lower_page); unlock_page(lower_page); goto out_release; } + BUG_ON(!lower_mapping->a_ops->writepage); - set_page_dirty(lower_page); clear_page_dirty_for_io(lower_page); /* emulate VFS behavior */ err = lower_mapping->a_ops->writepage(lower_page, wbc); if (err < 0) - 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/