On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:05:28AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:26:43AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 09-04-18 12:40:44, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > The problem is that the mapping gfp flags are used not only for allocating
> > > pages, but also for allocating
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:05:28AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:26:43AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 09-04-18 12:40:44, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > The problem is that the mapping gfp flags are used not only for allocating
> > > pages, but also for allocating
On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> @@ -2714,8 +2714,10 @@ static __always_inline void *slab_alloc_node(struct
> kmem_cache *s,
> stat(s, ALLOC_FASTPATH);
> }
>
> - if (unlikely(gfpflags & __GFP_ZERO) && object)
> -
On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> @@ -2714,8 +2714,10 @@ static __always_inline void *slab_alloc_node(struct
> kmem_cache *s,
> stat(s, ALLOC_FASTPATH);
> }
>
> - if (unlikely(gfpflags & __GFP_ZERO) && object)
> -
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> @@ -428,6 +428,7 @@ radix_tree_node_alloc(gfp_t gfp_mask, struct
> radix_tree_node *parent,
> ret->exceptional = exceptional;
> ret->parent = parent;
> ret->root = root;
> +
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> @@ -428,6 +428,7 @@ radix_tree_node_alloc(gfp_t gfp_mask, struct
> radix_tree_node *parent,
> ret->exceptional = exceptional;
> ret->parent = parent;
> ret->root = root;
> +
On Tue 10-04-18 04:56:51, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:59:03AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Okay, I hope this version clear current concerns.
>
> It doesn't. The right place to warn about GFP_ZERO used with a
> constructor is _slab_, like the patch I already sent. We have
On Tue 10-04-18 04:56:51, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:59:03AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Okay, I hope this version clear current concerns.
>
> It doesn't. The right place to warn about GFP_ZERO used with a
> constructor is _slab_, like the patch I already sent. We have
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:05:28AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:26:43AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 09-04-18 12:40:44, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > The problem is that the mapping gfp flags are used not only for allocating
> > > pages, but also for allocating
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:05:28AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:26:43AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 09-04-18 12:40:44, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > The problem is that the mapping gfp flags are used not only for allocating
> > > pages, but also for allocating
On Tue 10-04-18 05:05:28, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:26:43AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 09-04-18 12:40:44, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > The problem is that the mapping gfp flags are used not only for allocating
> > > pages, but also for allocating the page cache
On Tue 10-04-18 05:05:28, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:26:43AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 09-04-18 12:40:44, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > The problem is that the mapping gfp flags are used not only for allocating
> > > pages, but also for allocating the page cache
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:19:31PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> If you're okay for that, I really want to go my original patch
> Michal already gave Acked-by.
I NAK this patch. It is completely wrong.
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:19:31PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> If you're okay for that, I really want to go my original patch
> Michal already gave Acked-by.
I NAK this patch. It is completely wrong.
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:26:43AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 09-04-18 12:40:44, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > The problem is that the mapping gfp flags are used not only for allocating
> > pages, but also for allocating the page cache data structures that hold
> > the pages. F2FS is the
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:26:43AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 09-04-18 12:40:44, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > The problem is that the mapping gfp flags are used not only for allocating
> > pages, but also for allocating the page cache data structures that hold
> > the pages. F2FS is the
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:59:03AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Okay, I hope this version clear current concerns.
It doesn't. The right place to warn about GFP_ZERO used with a
constructor is _slab_, like the patch I already sent. We have no idea
what other places might have the same bug, and
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:59:03AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Okay, I hope this version clear current concerns.
It doesn't. The right place to warn about GFP_ZERO used with a
constructor is _slab_, like the patch I already sent. We have no idea
what other places might have the same bug, and
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:28:45PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 10-04-18 11:32:41, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 10-04-18 10:55:31, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > On Tue 10-04-18 10:22:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Mon 09-04-18 10:58:15, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > > Recently, I got a report like
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:28:45PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 10-04-18 11:32:41, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 10-04-18 10:55:31, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > On Tue 10-04-18 10:22:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Mon 09-04-18 10:58:15, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > > Recently, I got a report like
On Tue 10-04-18 11:32:41, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 10-04-18 10:55:31, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Tue 10-04-18 10:22:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Mon 09-04-18 10:58:15, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > Recently, I got a report like below.
> > > >
> > > > [ 7858.792946] [] __list_del_entry+0x30/0xd0
On Tue 10-04-18 11:32:41, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 10-04-18 10:55:31, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Tue 10-04-18 10:22:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Mon 09-04-18 10:58:15, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > Recently, I got a report like below.
> > > >
> > > > [ 7858.792946] [] __list_del_entry+0x30/0xd0
On Tue 10-04-18 10:55:31, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 10-04-18 10:22:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 09-04-18 10:58:15, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > Recently, I got a report like below.
> > >
> > > [ 7858.792946] [] __list_del_entry+0x30/0xd0
> > > [ 7858.792951] [] list_lru_del+0xac/0x1ac
> > > [
On Tue 10-04-18 10:55:31, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 10-04-18 10:22:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 09-04-18 10:58:15, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > Recently, I got a report like below.
> > >
> > > [ 7858.792946] [] __list_del_entry+0x30/0xd0
> > > [ 7858.792951] [] list_lru_del+0xac/0x1ac
> > > [
On Tue 10-04-18 10:22:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 09-04-18 10:58:15, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Recently, I got a report like below.
> >
> > [ 7858.792946] [] __list_del_entry+0x30/0xd0
> > [ 7858.792951] [] list_lru_del+0xac/0x1ac
> > [ 7858.792957] [] page_cache_tree_insert+0xd8/0x110
> > [
On Tue 10-04-18 10:22:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 09-04-18 10:58:15, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Recently, I got a report like below.
> >
> > [ 7858.792946] [] __list_del_entry+0x30/0xd0
> > [ 7858.792951] [] list_lru_del+0xac/0x1ac
> > [ 7858.792957] [] page_cache_tree_insert+0xd8/0x110
> > [
On Tue 10-04-18 11:59:03, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 07:41:52PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:33:39AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > @@ -522,7 +532,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(radix_tree_preload);
> > > */
> > > int radix_tree_maybe_preload(gfp_t
On Tue 10-04-18 11:59:03, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 07:41:52PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:33:39AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > @@ -522,7 +532,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(radix_tree_preload);
> > > */
> > > int radix_tree_maybe_preload(gfp_t
On Mon 09-04-18 12:40:44, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 11:38:27AM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 04/09, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > > On
On Mon 09-04-18 12:40:44, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 11:38:27AM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 04/09, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > > On
On Mon 09-04-18 10:58:15, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Recently, I got a report like below.
>
> [ 7858.792946] [] __list_del_entry+0x30/0xd0
> [ 7858.792951] [] list_lru_del+0xac/0x1ac
> [ 7858.792957] [] page_cache_tree_insert+0xd8/0x110
> [ 7858.792962] [] __add_to_page_cache_locked+0xf8/0x4e0
> [
On Mon 09-04-18 10:58:15, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Recently, I got a report like below.
>
> [ 7858.792946] [] __list_del_entry+0x30/0xd0
> [ 7858.792951] [] list_lru_del+0xac/0x1ac
> [ 7858.792957] [] page_cache_tree_insert+0xd8/0x110
> [ 7858.792962] [] __add_to_page_cache_locked+0xf8/0x4e0
> [
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 07:41:52PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:33:39AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > @@ -522,7 +532,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(radix_tree_preload);
> > */
> > int radix_tree_maybe_preload(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> > {
> > - if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp_mask))
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 07:41:52PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:33:39AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > @@ -522,7 +532,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(radix_tree_preload);
> > */
> > int radix_tree_maybe_preload(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> > {
> > - if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp_mask))
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:33:39AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> @@ -522,7 +532,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(radix_tree_preload);
> */
> int radix_tree_maybe_preload(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> {
> - if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp_mask))
> + if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp_mask) && !(gfp_mask &
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:33:39AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> @@ -522,7 +532,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(radix_tree_preload);
> */
> int radix_tree_maybe_preload(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> {
> - if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp_mask))
> + if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp_mask) && !(gfp_mask &
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:33:39AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:11PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:04:09AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:20:32AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > I don't think this is
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:33:39AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:11PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:04:09AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:20:32AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > I don't think this is
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:11PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:04:09AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:20:32AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > I don't think this is something the radix tree should know about.
> >
> > Because shadow entry
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:11PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:04:09AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:20:32AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > I don't think this is something the radix tree should know about.
> >
> > Because shadow entry
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:04:09AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:20:32AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > I don't think this is something the radix tree should know about.
>
> Because shadow entry implementation is hidden by radix tree implemetation.
> IOW, radix tree
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:04:09AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:20:32AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > I don't think this is something the radix tree should know about.
>
> Because shadow entry implementation is hidden by radix tree implemetation.
> IOW, radix tree
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:20:32AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 11:49:58PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:25:06PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > On 2018/4/9 19:25, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:20:32AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 11:49:58PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:25:06PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > On 2018/4/9 19:25, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 11:38:27AM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 04/09, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 11:38:27AM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 04/09, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On 04/09, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
On 04/09, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 03:52:15PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 09-04-18 06:41:14, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:48:52PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Mon 09-04-18 20:25:06, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > >
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 03:52:15PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 09-04-18 06:41:14, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:48:52PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Mon 09-04-18 20:25:06, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > >
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 11:49:58PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:25:06PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > On 2018/4/9 19:25, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 11:49:58PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:25:06PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > On 2018/4/9 19:25, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:25:06PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2018/4/9 19:25, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:25:06PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2018/4/9 19:25, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox
On Mon 09-04-18 06:41:14, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:48:52PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 09-04-18 20:25:06, Chao Yu wrote:
> > [...]
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > index c852e800..cc63f8c448f0 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> >
On Mon 09-04-18 06:41:14, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:48:52PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 09-04-18 20:25:06, Chao Yu wrote:
> > [...]
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > index c852e800..cc63f8c448f0 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> >
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:41:14AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> It's worth noting that this is endemic in filesystems.
For the rationale in XFS take a look at commit
ad22c7a043c2cc6792820e6c5da699935933e87d
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:41:14AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> It's worth noting that this is endemic in filesystems.
For the rationale in XFS take a look at commit
ad22c7a043c2cc6792820e6c5da699935933e87d
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:48:52PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 09-04-18 20:25:06, Chao Yu wrote:
> [...]
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > index c852e800..cc63f8c448f0 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > @@ -339,10 +339,10 @@ struct inode
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:48:52PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 09-04-18 20:25:06, Chao Yu wrote:
> [...]
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > index c852e800..cc63f8c448f0 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > @@ -339,10 +339,10 @@ struct inode
On Mon 09-04-18 20:25:06, Chao Yu wrote:
[...]
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> index c852e800..cc63f8c448f0 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> @@ -339,10 +339,10 @@ struct inode *f2fs_iget(struct super_block *sb,
> unsigned long ino)
> make_now:
>
On Mon 09-04-18 20:25:06, Chao Yu wrote:
[...]
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> index c852e800..cc63f8c448f0 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> @@ -339,10 +339,10 @@ struct inode *f2fs_iget(struct super_block *sb,
> unsigned long ino)
> make_now:
>
On 2018/4/9 19:25, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
>>> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim
On 2018/4/9 19:25, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
>>> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > It assumes shadow entry of
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:14:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > It assumes shadow entry of
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > It assumes shadow entry of radix tree relies on the init state
> > > that node->private_list
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:09:30PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > It assumes shadow entry of radix tree relies on the init state
> > > that node->private_list
On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > It assumes shadow entry of radix tree relies on the init state
> > that node->private_list allocated should be list_empty state.
> > Currently, it's initailized in
On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 07:49:25PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > It assumes shadow entry of radix tree relies on the init state
> > that node->private_list allocated should be list_empty state.
> > Currently, it's initailized in
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> It assumes shadow entry of radix tree relies on the init state
> that node->private_list allocated should be list_empty state.
> Currently, it's initailized in SLAB constructor which means
> node of radix tree would be initialized only
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:58:15AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> It assumes shadow entry of radix tree relies on the init state
> that node->private_list allocated should be list_empty state.
> Currently, it's initailized in SLAB constructor which means
> node of radix tree would be initialized only
Recently, I got a report like below.
[ 7858.792946] [] __list_del_entry+0x30/0xd0
[ 7858.792951] [] list_lru_del+0xac/0x1ac
[ 7858.792957] [] page_cache_tree_insert+0xd8/0x110
[ 7858.792962] [] __add_to_page_cache_locked+0xf8/0x4e0
[ 7858.792967] [] add_to_page_cache_lru+0x50/0x1ac
[ 7858.792972]
Recently, I got a report like below.
[ 7858.792946] [] __list_del_entry+0x30/0xd0
[ 7858.792951] [] list_lru_del+0xac/0x1ac
[ 7858.792957] [] page_cache_tree_insert+0xd8/0x110
[ 7858.792962] [] __add_to_page_cache_locked+0xf8/0x4e0
[ 7858.792967] [] add_to_page_cache_lru+0x50/0x1ac
[ 7858.792972]
74 matches
Mail list logo
