From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 21:53:33 -0300 (BRT) From: Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: [patch] vmfixes-2.4.0-test9-B2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andrea Arcangeli , Ingo Molnar , Rik van Riel , Roger Larsson , MM mailing list , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, 24 Sep 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Sun, 24 Sep 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > > On Sun, Sep 24, 2000 at 10:26:11PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > where will it deadlock? > > > > ext2_new_block (or whatever that runs getblk with the superlock lock > > acquired)->getblk->GFP->shrink_dcache_memory->prune_dcache-> > > prune_one_dentry->dput->dentry_iput->iput->inode->i_sb->s_op-> > > put_inode->ext2_discard_prealloc->ext2_free_blocks->lock_super->D > > Whee.. > > Good that you remembered (now that you mention it, I recollect that we had > this bug and discussion earlier). > > I added a comment to the effect, although I still moved the __GFP_IO test > into the icache and dcache shrink functions, because as with the > shm_swap() thing this is probably something we do want to fix eventually. Btw, why we need kmem_cache_shrink() inside shrink_{i,d}cache_memory ? Since refill_inactive and do_try_to_free_pages (the only functions which calls shrink_{i,d}cache_memory) already shrink the SLAB cache (with kmem_cache_reap), I dont think its needed. -- 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.eu.org/Linux-MM/