Re: Deadlock possibly caused by too_many_isolated.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 09/14/2010 07:11 PM, Neil Brown wrote:

Index: linux-2.6.32-SLE11-SP1/mm/vmscan.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.32-SLE11-SP1.orig/mm/vmscan.c	2010-09-15 08:37:32.000000000 +1000
+++ linux-2.6.32-SLE11-SP1/mm/vmscan.c	2010-09-15 08:38:57.000000000 +1000
@@ -1106,6 +1106,11 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
  		/* We are about to die and free our memory. Return now. */
  		if (fatal_signal_pending(current))
  			return SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX;
+		if (!(sc->gfp_mask&  __GFP_IO))
+			/* Not allowed to do IO, so mustn't wait
+			 * on processes that might try to
+			 */
+			return SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX;
  	}

  	/*

Close.  We must also be sure that processes without __GFP_FS
set in their gfp_mask do not wait on processes that do have
__GFP_FS set.

Considering how many times we've run into a bug like this,
I'm kicking myself for not having thought of it :(

--
All rights reversed

--
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>



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]