On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 02:49:13PM +, Weston Andros Adamson wrote:
> On Oct 20, 2014, at 9:57 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 02:32:29PM +0100, Weston Andros Adamson wrote:
> >> I’ve been very busy, but I haven’t forgotten about your bug report!
> >
> > No problem, I've bee
On Oct 20, 2014, at 9:57 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 02:32:29PM +0100, Weston Andros Adamson wrote:
>> Hey Will,
>
> Hi again, Andros,
>
>> I’ve been very busy, but I haven’t forgotten about your bug report!
>
> No problem, I've been busy too. I just checked with -rc1 and
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 02:32:29PM +0100, Weston Andros Adamson wrote:
> Hey Will,
Hi again, Andros,
> I’ve been very busy, but I haven’t forgotten about your bug report!
No problem, I've been busy too. I just checked with -rc1 and I can reproduce
the issue there too.
> I think the WARN_ON_ONCE
Hey Will,
I’ve been very busy, but I haven’t forgotten about your bug report!
I think the WARN_ON_ONCE is just wrong, there are cases where the PG_INODE_REF
flag is legitimately not set. The flag is set so that sub requests can mimmic
the parent
request’s reference count.
Could you please run t
On Sep 25, 2014, at 1:15 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Andros,
>
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 04:25:58PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 04:08:36PM +0100, Weston Andros Adamson wrote:
>>> On Sep 23, 2014, at 11:02 AM, Weston Andros Adamson
>>> wrote:
Wait a second - the wh
Hi Andros,
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 04:25:58PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 04:08:36PM +0100, Weston Andros Adamson wrote:
> > On Sep 23, 2014, at 11:02 AM, Weston Andros Adamson
> > wrote:
> > > Wait a second - the whole point of this extra reference (that the
> > > WARN_O
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 04:08:36PM +0100, Weston Andros Adamson wrote:
> On Sep 23, 2014, at 11:02 AM, Weston Andros Adamson
> wrote:
> > Wait a second - the whole point of this extra reference (that the
> > WARN_ON_ONCE is related to) is to handle the pass off to commit lists.
> >
> > Maybe I’m
On Sep 23, 2014, at 11:02 AM, Weston Andros Adamson
wrote:
> On Sep 23, 2014, at 10:59 AM, Weston Andros Adamson
> wrote:
>
>> On Sep 23, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:59:38PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:33:06PM +0100,
On Sep 23, 2014, at 10:59 AM, Weston Andros Adamson
wrote:
> On Sep 23, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:59:38PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:33:06PM +0100, Weston Andros Adamson wrote:
Any more info on how to reproduce this
On Sep 23, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:59:38PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:33:06PM +0100, Weston Andros Adamson wrote:
>>> Any more info on how to reproduce this would be really great. Unfortunately
>>> I don’t
>>> have access to
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:59:38PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:33:06PM +0100, Weston Andros Adamson wrote:
> > Any more info on how to reproduce this would be really great. Unfortunately
> > I don’t
> > have access to an arm64 system.
>
> I've not spotted a pattern othe
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 02:33:06PM +0100, Weston Andros Adamson wrote:
> On Sep 23, 2014, at 9:03 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> > I've been running into the following warning on an arm64 system running
> > 3.17-rc6 with 64k pages. I've been unable to reproduce with a smaller page
> > size (4k).
> >
>
On Sep 23, 2014, at 9:03 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've been running into the following warning on an arm64 system running
> 3.17-rc6 with 64k pages. I've been unable to reproduce with a smaller page
> size (4k).
>
> I don't yet have a concrete reproducer, but I've seen it hit a few
Hi all,
I've been running into the following warning on an arm64 system running
3.17-rc6 with 64k pages. I've been unable to reproduce with a smaller page
size (4k).
I don't yet have a concrete reproducer, but I've seen it hit a few times
today just running a machine with an NFS root filesystem a
14 matches
Mail list logo