Re: NFS regression? Odd delays and lockups accessing an NFS export.

[Ian Campbell <ijc-KcIKpvwj1kUDXYZnReoRVg@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1544 bytes --]

On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 13:03 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 12:33:09PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 08:59 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > I've found that the problem was backported into the stable stream since
> > > I cannot reproduce the issue with 2.6.26 but I can with 2.6.26.5. This
> > > is quite useful since there are only 3 relevant looking changesets in
> > > that range. I will bisect between these before confirming the culprit on
> > > mainline.
> 
> Could you double-check that this is reproduceable with this commit
> applied, and not reproduceable when it's not?

I've reproduced with exactly commit
f41f741838480aeaa3a189cff6e210503cf9c42d on trunk and am now running
2e96d2867245668dbdb973729288cf69b9fafa66 which is the changeset
immediately before.

> I suppose it's not impossible that this could be triggering the problem
> in some very roundabout way, but it seems a bit out of left field--so I
> wonder whether one of the bisection points could have gotten marked good
> when it should have been bad, or vice-versa.

It's possible, the good case is naturally quite hard to establish with
100% certainty. I declared v2.6.26 OK after an uptime of 4 days and 19
hours, compared with failure normally within 1-2 days. It's possible I
was premature in doing so. I'll run 2e96d2867 for at least a full week
before reporting back.

Ian.
-- 
Ian Campbell

Unix is mature OS, windows is still in diapers and they smell badly.
		-- Rafael Skodlar 

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]