tree 9803f7bdc847ed8cd5192816d9ca0ee9e310cd60
parent 969a19f1c405a8e9d15ceb9e75e3f4a321aaf56f
author Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> 1209542116 -0700
committer Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> 1209569395 -0700

mm: fix warning on memory offline

KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki found a warning message in the buffer dirtying code that
is coming from page migration caller.

WARNING: at fs/buffer.c:720 __set_page_dirty+0x330/0x360()
Call Trace:
 [<a000000100015220>] show_stack+0x80/0xa0
 [<a000000100015270>] dump_stack+0x30/0x60
 [<a000000100089ed0>] warn_on_slowpath+0x90/0xe0
 [<a0000001001f8b10>] __set_page_dirty+0x330/0x360
 [<a0000001001ffb90>] __set_page_dirty_buffers+0xd0/0x280
 [<a00000010012fec0>] set_page_dirty+0xc0/0x260
 [<a000000100195670>] migrate_page_copy+0x5d0/0x5e0
 [<a000000100197840>] buffer_migrate_page+0x2e0/0x3c0
 [<a000000100195eb0>] migrate_pages+0x770/0xe00

What was happening is that migrate_page_copy wants to transfer the PG_dirty
bit from old page to new page, so what it would do is set_page_dirty(newpage).
However set_page_dirty() is used to set the entire page dirty, wheras in
this case, only part of the page was dirty, and it also was not uptodate.

Marking the whole page dirty with set_page_dirty would lead to corruption or
unresolvable conditions -- a dirty && !uptodate page and dirty && !uptodate
buffers.

Possibly we could just ClearPageDirty(oldpage); SetPageDirty(newpage);
however in the interests of keeping the change minimal...

Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Tested-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>