On 11/17/2012 12:48 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Further offtopic..
Hi Hugh,
- I see you add this in vfs.txt:
+ fallocate: called by the VFS to preallocate blocks or punch a hole.
I want to know if it's necessary to add it to man page since users
still don't know fallocate can punch a hole
On 11/17/2012 12:48 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Further offtopic..
Thanks for your explanation, Hugh. :-)
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
Some questions about your shmem/tmpfs: misc and fallocate patchset.
- Since shmem_setattr can truncate tmpfs files, why need add another similar
On 11/17/2012 12:48 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Further offtopic..
Thanks for your explanation, Hugh. :-)
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
Some questions about your shmem/tmpfs: misc and fallocate patchset.
- Since shmem_setattr can truncate tmpfs files, why need add another similar
On 11/17/2012 12:48 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Further offtopic..
Hi Hugh,
- I see you add this in vfs.txt:
+ fallocate: called by the VFS to preallocate blocks or punch a hole.
I want to know if it's necessary to add it to man page since users
still don't know fallocate can punch a hole
Further offtopic..
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
> Some questions about your shmem/tmpfs: misc and fallocate patchset.
>
> - Since shmem_setattr can truncate tmpfs files, why need add another similar
> codes in function shmem_fallocate? What's the trick?
I don't know if I understand
On 11/16/2012 03:56 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Offtopic...
On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
Another question. Why the function shmem_fallocate which you add to kernel
need call shmem_getpage?
Because shmem_getpage(_gfp) is where shmem's
page lookup and allocation complexities are
On 11/16/2012 03:56 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Offtopic...
On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
Another question. Why the function shmem_fallocate which you add to kernel
need call shmem_getpage?
Because shmem_getpage(_gfp) is where shmem's
page lookup and allocation complexities are
Further offtopic..
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
Some questions about your shmem/tmpfs: misc and fallocate patchset.
- Since shmem_setattr can truncate tmpfs files, why need add another similar
codes in function shmem_fallocate? What's the trick?
I don't know if I understand
On 11/16/2012 03:56 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Offtopic...
On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
Another question. Why the function shmem_fallocate which you add to kernel
need call shmem_getpage?
Because shmem_getpage(_gfp) is where shmem's
page lookup and allocation complexities are
Offtopic...
On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
>
> Another question. Why the function shmem_fallocate which you add to kernel
> need call shmem_getpage?
Because shmem_getpage(_gfp) is where shmem's
page lookup and allocation complexities are handled.
I assume the question behind your
Offtopic...
On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
Another question. Why the function shmem_fallocate which you add to kernel
need call shmem_getpage?
Because shmem_getpage(_gfp) is where shmem's
page lookup and allocation complexities are handled.
I assume the question behind your
On 11/16/2012 03:56 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Offtopic...
On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
Another question. Why the function shmem_fallocate which you add to kernel
need call shmem_getpage?
Because shmem_getpage(_gfp) is where shmem's
page lookup and allocation complexities are
On 11/14/2012 11:50 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
On 11/07/2012 07:48 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Dave Jones wrote:
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 05:32:41PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> - /* We already confirmed swap, and
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 07:50:25PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> > Originally I was waiting to hear further from Dave; but his test
> > machine was giving trouble, and it occurred to me that, never mind
> > whether he says he has hit it again, or he
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012, Dave Jones wrote:
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 07:50:25PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Originally I was waiting to hear further from Dave; but his test
machine was giving trouble, and it occurred to me that, never mind
whether he says he has hit it again, or he has not
On 11/14/2012 11:50 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
On 11/07/2012 07:48 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Dave Jones wrote:
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 05:32:41PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
- /* We already confirmed swap, and
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 07:50:25PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Originally I was waiting to hear further from Dave; but his test
> machine was giving trouble, and it occurred to me that, never mind
> whether he says he has hit it again, or he has not hit it again,
> the answer is the same:
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
> On 11/07/2012 07:48 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 05:32:41PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > >
> > > > - /* We already confirmed swap, and make no
> > > allocation */
On 11/07/2012 07:48 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Dave Jones wrote:
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 05:32:41PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> -/* We already confirmed swap, and make no
allocation */
> -VM_BUG_ON(error);
> +
We're still hoping to hear back from Dave Jones: but either way,
please fold this patch into the earlier fix for 3.7 and -stable.
Remove its VM_BUG_ON: because either it's as I believe, a tautology
which cannot happen, and does not assert what I'd intended when I put
it in, and would even be
We're still hoping to hear back from Dave Jones: but either way,
please fold this patch into the earlier fix for 3.7 and -stable.
Remove its VM_BUG_ON: because either it's as I believe, a tautology
which cannot happen, and does not assert what I'd intended when I put
it in, and would even be
On 11/07/2012 07:48 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Dave Jones wrote:
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 05:32:41PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
-/* We already confirmed swap, and make no
allocation */
-VM_BUG_ON(error);
+
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
On 11/07/2012 07:48 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Dave Jones wrote:
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 05:32:41PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
- /* We already confirmed swap, and make no
allocation */
-
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 07:50:25PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Originally I was waiting to hear further from Dave; but his test
machine was giving trouble, and it occurred to me that, never mind
whether he says he has hit it again, or he has not hit it again,
the answer is the same: don't
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 03:48:20PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > [ cut here ]
> > WARNING: at mm/shmem.c:1151 shmem_getpage_gfp+0xa5c/0xa70()
> > Hardware name: 2012 Client Platform
> > Pid: 21798, comm: trinity-child4 Not tainted 3.7.0-rc4+ #54
>
> That's the
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 03:48:20PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
[ cut here ]
WARNING: at mm/shmem.c:1151 shmem_getpage_gfp+0xa5c/0xa70()
Hardware name: 2012 Client Platform
Pid: 21798, comm: trinity-child4 Not tainted 3.7.0-rc4+ #54
That's the very same
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 05:32:41PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> > - /* We already confirmed swap, and make no allocation */
> > - VM_BUG_ON(error);
> > + /*
> > + * We already
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 05:32:41PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> -/* We already confirmed swap, and make no allocation */
> -VM_BUG_ON(error);
> +/*
> + * We already confirmed swap under page lock, and make
> +
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 05:32:41PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
-/* We already confirmed swap, and make no allocation */
-VM_BUG_ON(error);
+/*
+ * We already confirmed swap under page lock, and make
+
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Dave Jones wrote:
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 05:32:41PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
- /* We already confirmed swap, and make no allocation */
- VM_BUG_ON(error);
+ /*
+ * We already confirmed swap
Fuzzing with trinity hit the "impossible" VM_BUG_ON(error)
(which Fedora has converted to WARNING) in shmem_getpage_gfp():
WARNING: at mm/shmem.c:1151 shmem_getpage_gfp+0xa5c/0xa70()
Pid: 29795, comm: trinity-child4 Not tainted 3.7.0-rc2+ #49
Call Trace:
[] warn_slowpath_common+0x7f/0xc0
[]
Fuzzing with trinity hit the impossible VM_BUG_ON(error)
(which Fedora has converted to WARNING) in shmem_getpage_gfp():
WARNING: at mm/shmem.c:1151 shmem_getpage_gfp+0xa5c/0xa70()
Pid: 29795, comm: trinity-child4 Not tainted 3.7.0-rc2+ #49
Call Trace:
[8107100f]
32 matches
Mail list logo
