xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

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

To: 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: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG <s.priebe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:13:06 +0200
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@xxxxxxxxxx>, Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20160531073119.GD12670@dastard>
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>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0
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?

Stefan

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