> > Fengguang, how about merging also the attached simple patch together with > > my fix? With these two patches, I'm not able to trigger any sync livelock > > while without one of them I hit them quite easily... > > This looks OK. However note that redirty_tail() can modify > dirtied_when unexpectedly. So the more we rely on wb_start, the more > possibility an inode is (wrongly) skipped by sync. I have a bunch of > patches to remove redirty_tail(). However they may not be good > candidates for 2.6.36.. It looks that setting wb_start at the beginning of writeback_inodes_wb() won't be easily affected by redirty_tail(). So Reviewed-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> Thanks, Fengguang -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>