There are two possible races in handling of private_list in buffer cache.
1) When fsync_buffers_list() processes a private_list, it clears
b_assoc_mapping and moves buffer to its private list. Now drop_buffers() comes,
sees a buffer is on list so it calls __remove_assoc_queue() which complains
There are two possible races in handling of private_list in buffer cache.
1) When fsync_buffers_list() processes a private_list, it clears
b_assoc_mapping and moves buffer to its private list. Now drop_buffers() comes,
sees a buffer is on list so it calls __remove_assoc_queue() which complains
On Fri 11-01-08 15:33:54, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:21:31 +0100
> Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu 10-01-08 16:36:35, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:55:13 +0100
> > > Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > >
On Fri 11-01-08 15:33:54, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:21:31 +0100
> Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu 10-01-08 16:36:35, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:55:13 +0100
> > > Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > >
On Fri 11-01-08 15:33:54, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:21:31 +0100
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu 10-01-08 16:36:35, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:55:13 +0100
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
sorry for the previous empty
On Fri 11-01-08 15:33:54, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:21:31 +0100
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu 10-01-08 16:36:35, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:55:13 +0100
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
sorry for the previous empty
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:21:31 +0100
Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu 10-01-08 16:36:35, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:55:13 +0100
> > Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > sorry for the previous empty email...
> > >
> > > Supriya noted
On Thu 10-01-08 16:36:35, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:55:13 +0100
> Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > sorry for the previous empty email...
> >
> > Supriya noted in his testing that sometimes buffers removed by
> > __remove_assoc_queue() don't have
On Thu 10-01-08 16:36:35, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:55:13 +0100
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
sorry for the previous empty email...
Supriya noted in his testing that sometimes buffers removed by
__remove_assoc_queue() don't have b_assoc_mapping set
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:21:31 +0100
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu 10-01-08 16:36:35, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:55:13 +0100
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
sorry for the previous empty email...
Supriya noted in his testing that
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:55:13 +0100
Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sorry for the previous empty email...
>
> Supriya noted in his testing that sometimes buffers removed by
> __remove_assoc_queue() don't have b_assoc_mapping set (and thus IO error
> won't be properly
Hi,
sorry for the previous empty email...
Supriya noted in his testing that sometimes buffers removed by
__remove_assoc_queue() don't have b_assoc_mapping set (and thus IO error
won't be properly propagated). Actually, looking more into the code I found
there are some more races. The patch
Hi,
--
Jan Kara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Hi,
--
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Hi,
sorry for the previous empty email...
Supriya noted in his testing that sometimes buffers removed by
__remove_assoc_queue() don't have b_assoc_mapping set (and thus IO error
won't be properly propagated). Actually, looking more into the code I found
there are some more races. The patch
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:55:13 +0100
Jan Kara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
sorry for the previous empty email...
Supriya noted in his testing that sometimes buffers removed by
__remove_assoc_queue() don't have b_assoc_mapping set (and thus IO error
won't be properly propagated).
16 matches
Mail list logo