[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061122105703.GZ8055@kernel.dk>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 11:57:03 +0100
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: Simple script that locks up my box with recent kernels
On Wed, Nov 22 2006, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> On 22/11/06, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> wrote:
> >On Tue, Nov 21 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >> I don't think we use any irq-disable locking in the VM itself, but I
> >could
> >> imagine some nasty situation with the block device layer getting into a
> >> deadlock with interrupts disabled when it runs out of queue entries and
> >> cannot allocate more memory..
> >
> >Not likely. Request allocation is done with GFP_NOIO and backed by a
> >memory pool, so as long the vm doesn't go totally nuts because
> >__GFP_WAIT is set, we should be safe there. If it did go crazy, I
> >suspect a sysrq-t would still work.
> >
> >If bouncing is involved for swap, we do have a potential deadlock issue
> >that isn't fixed yet. I just whipped up this completely untested patch,
> >it should shed some light on that issue.
> >
> Thanks Jens, I'll apply that later tonight and force a few lockups and
> see if I get any extra details with that patch.
Can you post a full dmesg too, as well as clarify which device holds the
swap space?
--
Jens Axboe
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists