From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4632A1A6.90702@google.com> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:21:42 -0700 From: Ethan Solomita MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: NR_UNSTABLE_FS vs. NR_FILE_DIRTY: double counting pages? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: LKML , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: sync_inodes_sb() balance_dirty_pages() wakeup_pdflush() wb_kupdate() prefetch_suitable() I can trace a standard codepath where it seems both of these are set on the same page: nfs_file_aops.commit_write -> nfs_commit_write nfs_updatepages nfs_writepage_setup nfs_wb_page nfs_wb_page_priority nfs_writepage_locked nfs_flush_mapping nfs_flush_list nfs_flush_multi nfs_write_partial_ops.rpc_call_done nfs_writeback_done_partial nfs_writepage_release nfs_reschedule_unstable_write nfs_mark_request_commit incr NR_UNSTABLE_NFS nfs_file_aops.commit_write -> nfs_commit_write nfs_updatepage __set_page_dirty_nobuffers incr NF_FILE_DIRTY This is the standard code path that derives from sys_write(). Can someone either show how this code sequence can't happen, or confirm for me that there's a bug? -- Ethan -- 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