[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1213994489.6474.127.camel@lts-notebook>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 16:41:29 -0400
From: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Kosaki Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Experimental][PATCH] putback_lru_page rework
On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 13:10 -0400, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 10:13 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > Lee-san, this is an additonal one..
> > Not-tested-yet, just by review.
>
> OK, I'll test this on my x86_64 platform, which doesn't seem to hit the
> soft lockups.
>
Quick update:
With this patch applied, at ~ 1.5 hours into the test, my system panic'd
[panic_on_oops set] with a BUG in __find_get_block() -- looks like the
BUG_ON() in check_irqs_on() called from bh_lru_install() inlined by
__find_get_block(). Before the panic occurred, I saw warnings from
native_smp_call_function_mask() [arch/x86/kernel/smp.c]--also because
irqs_disabled().
I'll back out the changes [spin_[un]lock() => spin_[un]lock_irq()] to
shrink_inactive_list() and try again. Just a hunch.
Lee
--
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