From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1757686AbZENXiX@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1757686AbZENXiX (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 14 May 2009 19:38:23 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754272AbZENXiM
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Thu, 14 May 2009 19:38:12 -0400
Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:46491 "EHLO
	fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753241AbZENXiL (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 14 May 2009 19:38:11 -0400
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: kernel BUG at mm/slqb.c:1411!
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>,
       Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
       LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <20090514175332.9B7B.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
References: <1242289830.21646.5.camel@penberg-laptop> <20090514175332.9B7B.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Message-Id: <20090515083726.F5BF.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.50.07 [ja]
Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 08:38:04 +0900 (JST)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> > On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 17:37 +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Wed, 13 May 2009 16:42:37 +0900 (JST)
> > > KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hmm. I don't know slqb well.
> > > So, It's just my guess. 
> > > 
> > > We surely increase l->nr_partial in  __slab_alloc_page.
> > > In between l->nr_partial++ and call __cache_list_get_page, Who is decrease l->nr_partial again.
> > > After all, __cache_list_get_page return NULL and hit the VM_BUG_ON.
> > > 
> > > Comment said :
> > > 
> > >         /* Protects nr_partial, nr_slabs, and partial */
> > >   spinlock_t    page_lock;
> > > 
> > > As comment is right, We have to hold the l->page_lock ?
> > 
> > Makes sense. Nick? Motohiro-san, can you try this patch please?
> 
> This issue is very rarely. please give me one night.

-ENOTREPRODUCED

I guess your patch is right fix. thanks!