lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] fs: ext4: use BUG_ON if writepage call comes from direct reclaim
From
Date


On 7/3/18 10:05 AM, Yang Shi wrote:
>
>
> On 7/3/18 3:39 AM, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 12:11:18PM +0800, Yang Shi wrote:
>>> direct reclaim doesn't write out filesystem page, only kswapd could do
>>> it. So, if the call comes from direct reclaim, it is definitely a bug.
>>>
>>> And, Mel Gormane also mentioned "Ultimately, this will be a BUG_ON." In
>>> commit 94054fa3fca1fd78db02cb3d68d5627120f0a1d4 ("xfs: warn if direct
>>> reclaim tries to writeback pages").
>>>
>>> Although it is for xfs, ext4 has the similar behavior, so elevate
>>> WARN_ON to BUG_ON.
>>>
>>> And, correct the comment accordingly.
>>>
>>> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
>>> Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
>>> Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
>> What's the upside of crashing the kernel if the file sytsem can
>> handle it?

BTW, the comment does sound misleading. Direct reclaim is not a
legitimate context to call writepage. I'd like to correct at least.

Thanks,
Yang

>
> I'm not sure if it is a good choice to let filesystem handle such
> vital VM regression. IMHO, writing out filesystem page from direct
> reclaim context is a vital VM bug. It means something is definitely
> wrong in VM. It should never happen.
>
> It sounds ok to have filesystem throw out warning and handle it, but
> I'm not sure if someone will just ignore the warning, but it should
> *never* be ignored.
>
> Yang
>
>>
>>                                                 - Ted
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-07-04 01:11    [W:0.104 / U:2.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site