On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 06:22:14PM +0200, Jerome Marchand wrote:
> > Thanks. Sorry for the long delay but I finally got back to the bug this
> > week. NFS can be modified to special case the swapfile but I was not happy
> > with the result for multiple reasons. It took me a while to see a way for
>
On 08/20/2015 02:23 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 01:25:47PM +0200, Jerome Marchand wrote:
>> On 07/27/2015 12:52 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 03:46:16PM +0200, Jerome Marchand wrote:
On 07/22/2015 02:23 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 20
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 01:25:47PM +0200, Jerome Marchand wrote:
> On 07/27/2015 12:52 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 03:46:16PM +0200, Jerome Marchand wrote:
> >> On 07/22/2015 02:23 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:10 AM, Jerome Marchand
> >>> wrote:
On 07/27/2015 12:52 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 03:46:16PM +0200, Jerome Marchand wrote:
>> On 07/22/2015 02:23 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:10 AM, Jerome Marchand
>>> wrote:
Lockdep warns about a inconsistent {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} ->
{IN
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 03:46:16PM +0200, Jerome Marchand wrote:
> On 07/22/2015 02:23 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:10 AM, Jerome Marchand
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Lockdep warns about a inconsistent {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} ->
> >> {IN-RECLAIM_FS-W} usage. The culpritt is the ino
On 07/22/2015 02:23 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:10 AM, Jerome Marchand wrote:
>>
>> Lockdep warns about a inconsistent {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} ->
>> {IN-RECLAIM_FS-W} usage. The culpritt is the inode->i_mutex taken in
>> nfs_file_direct_write(). This code was introduced by com
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:10 AM, Jerome Marchand wrote:
>
> Lockdep warns about a inconsistent {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} ->
> {IN-RECLAIM_FS-W} usage. The culpritt is the inode->i_mutex taken in
> nfs_file_direct_write(). This code was introduced by commit a9ab5e840669
> ("nfs: page cache invalidation for
Lockdep warns about a inconsistent {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} ->
{IN-RECLAIM_FS-W} usage. The culpritt is the inode->i_mutex taken in
nfs_file_direct_write(). This code was introduced by commit a9ab5e840669
("nfs: page cache invalidation for dio").
This naive test patch avoid to take the mutex on a swapfile
8 matches
Mail list logo