On Tuesday 09 January 2007 18:58, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > Subject : BUG: at mm/truncate.c:60 cancel_dirty_page() (reiserfs) > > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/7/117 > > Submitter : Malte Schröder <[email protected]> > > Status : unknown > > Adrian, this is also available as > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/5/308 > > But, at worst, I don't think this is a show-stopper (oh, well: I actually > liked it better when "WARN_ON()" said _warning_, not BUG, since it > separates out the two cases visually much better, but others disagreed. > Crud). --8<-- > So something interesting is definitely going on, but I don't know exactly > what it is. Why does reiserfs do the truncate as part of a close, if the > same inode is actually mapped somewhere else? And if it's a race with two > different CPU's (one doing a "munmap()" and the other doing a "close()", > then the unmap should _still_ have actually unmapped the pages before it > actually did _its_ "release()" call. This was on a single core. But with CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY=y. It didn't happen again since then. > > In general, a filesystem should never do a truncate at "release()" time > _anyway_. It should do it at "drop_inode" time. > > So I think this does show some confusion in reiserfs, but it's not > anything new. The only new thing is that the _message_ happens. > > So I don't personally consider this a regression. Just a sign of old and > preexisting confusion that is now uncovered by new code (and it will print > out the scary message at most four times, and then stop complaining about > it. So apart from the scary message, nothing new and bad has really > happened). I also didn't reboot the machine afterwards and did not notice any problems beside that one message. -- --------------------------------------- Malte Schröder [email protected] ICQ# 68121508 ---------------------------------------
Attachment:
pgplNVF7FNn02.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 2.6.20-rc4: known unfixed regressions (v2)
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.20-rc4: known unfixed regressions (v2)
- References:
- Linux 2.6.20-rc4
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- 2.6.20-rc4: known unfixed regressions (v2)
- From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.20-rc4: known unfixed regressions (v2)
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Linux 2.6.20-rc4
- Prev by Date: [PATCH] JFS: possible recursive locking detected
- Next by Date: Re: Jumping into Kernel development: About -rc kernels...
- Previous by thread: Re: 2.6.20-rc4: known unfixed regressions (v2)
- Next by thread: Re: 2.6.20-rc4: known unfixed regressions (v2)
- Index(es):
 |