On sun, 27 Mar 2011 14:30:55 +0900, Itaru Kitayama wrote:
Chris' stress test, stress.sh -n 50 -c /mnt/linux-2.6 /mnt gave me another
lockdep splat
(see below). I applied your V5 patches on top of the next-rc branch.
I got it. It is because the allocation flag of the metadata's page cache,
Hi Miao,
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 15:00:00 +0800
Miao Xie mi...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
I got it. It is because the allocation flag of the metadata's page cache,
which is stored in
the btree inode's i_mapping, was set to be GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE. So if we
allocate pages for
btree's page cache,
On sun, 27 Mar 2011 20:09:10 +0900, Itaru Kitayama wrote:
Hi Miao,
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 15:00:00 +0800
Miao Xie mi...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
I got it. It is because the allocation flag of the metadata's page cache,
which is stored in
the btree inode's i_mapping, was set to be
Excerpts from Miao Xie's message of 2011-03-27 07:44:06 -0400:
On sun, 27 Mar 2011 20:09:10 +0900, Itaru Kitayama wrote:
Hi Miao,
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 15:00:00 +0800
Miao Xie mi...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
I got it. It is because the allocation flag of the metadata's page cache,
Excerpts from Miao Xie's message of 2011-03-24 07:41:31 -0400:
Changelog V4 - V5:
- Fix the race on adding the delayed node to the inode, which is spotted by
Chris Mason.
- Merge Chris Mason's incremental patch into this patch.
- Fix deadlock between readdir() and memory fault, which is
Hi Miao,
Chris' stress test, stress.sh -n 50 -c /mnt/linux-2.6 /mnt gave me another
lockdep splat
(see below). I applied your V5 patches on top of the next-rc branch.
I haven't triggered it in my actual testing, but do you think we can iterate a
list of block
groups in an lockless manner
Hi,
there's one thing I want to bring up. It's not related to delayed
functionality itself but to git tree base of the patch.
There's a merge conflict when your patch is applied directly onto
Linus' tree, and not when on Chris' one.
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 07:41:31PM +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
...
