lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: BUG: Bad page state [was: Strange oopses in 2.6.30]
Date
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:39:53AM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > (cc to Mel and some reviewer)
> >
> > > Flags are:
> > > 0000000000400000 -- __PG_MLOCKED
> > > 800000000050000c -- my page flags
> > > 3650000c -- Maxim's page flags
> > > 0000000000693ce1 -- my PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_FREE
> >
> > I guess commit da456f14d (page allocator: do not disable interrupts in
> > free_page_mlock()) is a bit wrong.
> >
> > current code is:
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > static void free_hot_cold_page(struct page *page, int cold)
> > {
> > (snip)
> > int clearMlocked = PageMlocked(page);
> > (snip)
> > if (free_pages_check(page))
> > return;
> > (snip)
> > local_irq_save(flags);
> > if (unlikely(clearMlocked))
> > free_page_mlock(page);
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Oh well, we remove PG_Mlocked *after* free_pages_check().
> > Then, it makes false-positive warning.
> >
> > Sorry, my review was also wrong. I think reverting this patch is better ;)
> >
>
> I think a revert is way overkill. The intention of the patch is sound -
> reducing the number of times interrupts are disabled. Having pages
> with the PG_locked bit is now somewhat of an expected situation. I'd
> prefer to go with either
>
> 1. Unconditionally clearing the bit with TestClearPageLocked as the
> patch already posted does
> 2. Removing PG_locked from the free_pages_check()
> 3. Unlocking the pages as we go when an mlocked VMA is being torn town
>
> The patch that addresses 1 seemed ok to me. What do you think?

Yes, I've overlooked Hanns's patch. I think that is good patch.
Thansk folks.






\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-23 13:07    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans