On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 08:53:38PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 02:02:27AM +0200, Quentin Godfroy wrote: > > > > I rebooted, but as I didn't know exactly how to trigger the bug except than > > by waiting a few days I was waiting to see. > > > > Do you have an idea about how to trigger the bug? > > The bug is that each time a transaction commits, if the buffer head > hasn't been leaked already, it will leak pinning the memory until the > total size of the journal is taking up memory. If you have a 2gigs of > memory, and a single filesystem with 256meg journal, you might not > notice the problem at all. If you less than 256 megs of memory, > you'll notice fairly quickly. Indeed after a couple of days of uptime the number of dirty blocks do not go further than ~50, so I think the bug is corrected as far as I am concerned. By the way, why does the kernel not commit to memory these remaining buffers when the memory is scarse (say instead of firing an OOM killer)? Regards Quentin Godfroy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
