On 10/25/2012 02:59 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:

On Thu, 25 Oct 2012, Ni zhan Chen wrote:

quoted

On 10/25/2012 12:36 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 24 Oct 2012, Dave Jones wrote:

quoted

Machine under significant load (4gb memory used, swap usage fluctuating)
triggered this...

WARNING: at mm/shmem.c:1151 shmem_getpage_gfp+0xa5c/0xa70()
Pid: 29795, comm: trinity-child4 Not tainted 3.7.0-rc2+ #49

1148                         error = shmem_add_to_page_cache(page,
mapping, index,
1149                                                 gfp,
swp_to_radix_entry(swap));
1150                         /* We already confirmed swap, and make no
allocation */
1151                         VM_BUG_ON(error);
1152                 }

That's very surprising.  Easy enough to handle an error there, but
of course I made it a VM_BUG_ON because it violates my assumptions:
I rather need to understand how this can be, and I've no idea.

Clutching at straws, I expect this is entirely irrelevant, but:
there isn't a warning on line 1151 of mm/shmem.c in 3.7.0-rc2 nor
in current linux.git; rather, there's a VM_BUG_ON on line 1149.

So you've inserted a couple of lines for some reason (more useful
trinity behaviour, perhaps)?  And have some config option I'm
unfamiliar with, that mutates a BUG_ON or VM_BUG_ON into a warning?

Hi Hugh,

I think it maybe caused by your commit [d189922862e03ce: shmem: fix negative
rss in memcg memory.stat], one question:

Well, yes, I added the VM_BUG_ON in that commit.

quoted

if function shmem_confirm_swap confirm the entry has already brought back
from swap by a racing thread,

The reverse: true confirms that the swap entry has not been brought back
from swap by a racing thread; false indicates that there has been a race.

quoted

then why call shmem_add_to_page_cache to add
page from swapcache to pagecache again?

Adding it to pagecache again, after such a race, would set error to
-EEXIST (originating from radix_tree_insert); but we don't do that,
we add it to pagecache when it has not already been added.

Or that's the intention: but Dave seems to have found an unexpected
exception, despite us holding the page lock across all this.

(But if it weren't for the memcg and replace_page issues, I'd much
prefer to let shmem_add_to_page_cache discover the race as before.)

Hugh

Hi Hugh

Thanks for your response. You mean the -EEXIST originating from 
radix_tree_insert, in radix_tree_insert:
if (slot != NULL)
     return -EEXIST;
But why slot should be NULL? if no race, the pagecache related radix 
tree entry should be RADIX_TREE_EXCEPTIONAL_ENTRY+swap_entry_t.val, 
where I miss?

Regards,
Chen

quoted

otherwise, will goto unlock and then go to repeat? where I miss?

Regards,
Chen

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>