[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090210062249.GA5224@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 07:22:49 +0100
From: Damien Wyart <damien.wyart@...e.fr>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Federico Cuello <fedux@...men.org.ar>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@...ia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] write-back: fix break condition
* Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de> [2009-02-10 01:34]:
> On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 03:21:40PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Thanks, but please do cc the people who were involved with a patch when
> > you find a problem with it!
> > On Sat, 7 Feb 2009 01:33:30 -0200
> > Federico Cuello <fedux@...men.org.ar> wrote:
> > > Commit 673353723e7a6550625fb719059c5f31cfaecd18 fixed nr_to_write
> > > counter, but didn't set the break condition properly.
> > It's actually commit dcf6a79dda5cc2a2bec183e50d829030c0972aaa
> > ("write-back: fix nr_to_write counter").
> > > If nr_to_write == 0 after being decremented it will loop one more time
> > > before setting done = 1 and breaking the loop.
> > We prefer that patches include the author's Signed-off-by:, as per
> > Documentation/SubmittingPatches, please.
> > > diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
> > > index bb5fa2b..9e2ae50 100644
> > > --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
> > > +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
> > > @@ -981,20 +981,21 @@ continue_unlock:
> > > }
> > > }
> > > - if (nr_to_write > 0)
> > > + if (nr_to_write > 0) {
> > > nr_to_write--;
> > > - else if (wbc->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_NONE) {
> > > - /*
> > > - * We stop writing back only if we are not
> > > - * doing integrity sync. In case of integrity
> > > - * sync we have to keep going because someone
> > > - * may be concurrently dirtying pages, and we
> > > - * might have synced a lot of newly appeared
> > > - * dirty pages, but have not synced all of the
> > > - * old dirty pages.
> > > - */
> > > - done = 1;
> > > - break;
> > > + if (nr_to_write == 0 && wbc->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_NONE) {
> > > + /*
> > > + * We stop writing back only if we are not
> > > + * doing integrity sync. In case of integrity
> > > + * sync we have to keep going because someone
> > > + * may be concurrently dirtying pages, and we
> > > + * might have synced a lot of newly appeared
> > > + * dirty pages, but have not synced all of the
> > > + * old dirty pages.
> > > + */
> > > + done = 1;
> > > + break;
> > > + }
> > > }
> > > if (wbc->nonblocking && bdi_write_congested(bdi)) {
> > Artem, Nick, please check?
> Yes, this looks OK by me.
> Acked-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Shouldn't this go to stable 2.6.28, too ? They have not been in Cc for
now. I think the problem was at first detected in 2.6.28.X, but it is
not yet sure if it is solved or if this interacts with some ext4
problems.
--
Damien Wyart
--
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