xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: shrink_active_list/try_to_release_page bug? (was Re: xfs trace in 4.

To: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG <s.priebe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: shrink_active_list/try_to_release_page bug? (was Re: xfs trace in 4.4.2 / also in 4.3.3 WARNING fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c:1232 xfs_vm_releasepage)
From: Holger HoffstÃtte <holger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:44:30 +0200
Cc: linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, Minchan Kim <minchan@xxxxxxxxxx>, Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <575022D2.7030502@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Applied Asynchrony, Inc.
References: <20160516010602.GA24980@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <57420A47.2000700@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20160522213850.GE26977@dastard> <574BEA84.3010206@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20160530223657.GP26977@dastard> <20160531010724.GA9616@bbox> <20160531025509.GA12670@dastard> <20160531035904.GA17371@bbox> <20160531060712.GC12670@dastard> <574D2B1E.2040002@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20160531073119.GD12670@dastard> <575022D2.7030502@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0
On 06/02/16 14:13, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
> 
> Am 31.05.2016 um 09:31 schrieb Dave Chinner:
>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 08:11:42AM +0200, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
>>>> I'm half tempted at this point to mostly ignore this mm/ behavour
>>>> because we are moving down the path of removing buffer heads from
>>>> XFS. That will require us to do different things in ->releasepage
>>>> and so just skipping dirty pages in the XFS code is the best thing
>>>> to do....
>>>
>>> does this change anything i should test? Or is 4.6 still the way to go?
>>
>> Doesn't matter now - the warning will still be there on 4.6. I think
>> you can simply ignore it as the XFS code appears to be handling the
>> dirty page that is being passed to it correctly. We'll work out what
>> needs to be done to get rid of the warning for this case, wether it
>> be a mm/ change or an XFS change.
> 
> Any idea what i could do with 4.4.X? Can i safely remove the WARN_ONCE
> statement?

By definition it won't break anything since it's just a heads-up message,
so yes, it should be "safe". However if my understanding of the situation
is correct, mainline commit f0281a00fe "mm: workingset: only do workingset
activations on reads" (+ friends) in 4.7 should effectively prevent this
from happenning. Can someone confirm or deny this?

-h

PS: Stefan: I backported that commit (and friends) to my 4.4.x patch queue,
so if you want to try that for today's 4.4.12 the warning should be gone.
No guarantees though :)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>