From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 09:30:58 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [Experimental][PATCH] putback_lru_page rework Message-Id: <20080623093058.9976359f.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20080621175458.E82A.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <1213981843.6474.68.camel@lts-notebook> <1213994489.6474.127.camel@lts-notebook> <20080621175458.E82A.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Lee Schermerhorn , Daisuke Nishimura , Andrew Morton , Rik van Riel , Nick Piggin , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-testers@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 17:56:17 +0900 KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > 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. > > Yup. > Kamezawa-san's patch remove local_irq_enable(), but don't remove > local_irq_disable(). > thus, irq is never enabled. > Sorry, -Kame > > - spin_unlock(&zone->lru_lock); > > + spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock); > > done: > > - local_irq_enable(); > > > -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org