Re: WARNING: at mm/page-writeback.c:1990 __set_page_dirty_nobuffers+0x13a/0x170()

[Linus Torvalds]

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Hugh Dickins <hughd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Move the lock after the loop, I think you meant.

Well, I wasn't sure if anything inside the loop might need it. I don't
*think* so, but at the same time, what protects "page_order(page)"
(or, indeed PageBuddy()) from being stable while that loop content
uses them?

I don't understand that code at all. It does that crazy iteration over
page, and changes "page" in random ways, and then finishes up with a
totally new "page" value that is some random thing that is *after* the
end_page thing. WHAT?

The code makes no sense. It tests all those pages within the
page-block, but then after it has done all those tests, it does the
final

  set_pageblock_migratetype(..)
  move_freepages_block(..)

using a page that is *beyond* the pageblock (and with the whole
page_order() thing, who knows just how far beyond it?)

It looks entirely too much like random-monkey code to me.

            Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/