On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 18:21 -0700, Ethan Solomita wrote: > There are several places where we add together NR_UNSTABLE_FS and > NF_FILE_DIRTY: > > 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
It should not happen. If the page is on the unstable list, then it will be committed before nfs_updatepage is allowed to redirty it. See the recent fixes in 2.6.21-rc7. Trond - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
