Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 27 Sep 1999 01:59:32 -0300 (EST) | From | Marcelo Tosatti <> | Subject | Re: hm, busy page invalidated? (not necesserily a bug) |
| |
I noticed that too. Seems that the loop driver is "unported" to the new pagecache.
- Marcelo
On Mon, 27 Sep 1999, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> Setting up a loop device on top of a newly created regular file > triggers lots of "hm, busy page invalidated? (not necesserily a bug)" > warnings from mm/filemap.c:invalidate_inode_pages(). > > For example, if I do the following: > > rm -f /tmp/junk > dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/junk bs=1k count=1024 > losetup /dev/loop0 /tmp/junk > > the kernel message buffer immediately fills with the abovementioned > warning. This happens in all kernels >= 2.3.7. > > The message is generated by this test in invalidate_inode_pages(): > > get_page(page); > ... > if (page_count(page) != 2) > printk("hm, busy page invalidated? (not necesserily a bug)\n"); > > When drivers/block/loop.c:loop_set_fd() calls invalidate_inode_pages(), > it seems that each page in the backing file already has a count of 2, > so at the test the count is 3, which triggers the message. > > I haven't noticed any other negative effects when using loop devices > (no kernel instability or data corruption) so I suspect the test is > bogus and should be removed or modified. > > What sayeth the VFS/page cache experts? > > > /Mikael
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |