Am Sonntag, 21. Oktober 2007 schrieb Eric W. Biederman:About being rare, when I force the VM to be more aggressive reclaiming buffer by using the following patch: --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/buffer.c +++ linux-2.6/fs/buffer.c @@ -3225,7 +3225,7 @@ void __init buffer_init(void) * Limit the bh occupancy to 10% of ZONE_NORMAL */ nrpages = (nr_free_buffer_pages() * 10) / 100; - max_buffer_heads = nrpages * (PAGE_SIZE / sizeof(struct buffer_head)); + max_buffer_heads = 0; hotcpu_notifier(buffer_cpu_notify, 0); } I can actually cause data corruption within some seconds. So I think the problem is real enough to be worth fixing. I still dont fully understand what issues you have with my patch. - it obviously fixes the problem - I am not aware of any regression it introduces - its small One concern you had, was the fact that buffer heads are out of sync with struct pages. Testing your first patch revealed that this is actually needed by reiserfs - and maybe others. I can also see, that my patch looks a bit like a bandaid that cobbles the rd pieces together. Is there anything else, that makes my patch unmergeable in your opinion? Christian -
| Adrian Bunk | Re: Linux 2.6.21 |
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.21-rc2 |
| WANG Cong | [-mm Patch] UML: fix a building error |
| Roland McGrath | Re: [PATCH 0/5] ftrace: to kill a daemon |
git: | |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Patrick McHardy | Re: [PATCH] netfilter: use per-cpu spinlock rather than RCU (v3) |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Theodore Ts'o | Re: cc1 fails silently |
| Michael Nolan | Power routines on notebook cause kernel panic |
| Marc Peters | v 0.11 boot disk problem |
| Dave `geek' Gymer | WARNING (was Re: New afio release) |
