All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>
To: Stephane Doyon <sdoyon@max-t.com>, Luciano Chavez <lnx1138@us.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Infinite loop in xfssyncd on full file system
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 09:14:29 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060823231429.GF807872@melbourne.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1156360259.5368.7.camel@localhost> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608231056370.3139@madrid.max-t.internal>

On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 11:00:43AM -0400, Stephane Doyon wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, David Chinner wrote:
> 
> >On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 02:02:18PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> >>On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 04:01:10PM -0400, Stephane Doyon wrote:
> >>>I'm seeing what appears to be an infinite loop in xfssyncd. It is
> >>>triggered when writing to a file system that is full or nearly full. I
> >>>have pinpointed the change that introduced this problem: it's
> >>>
> >>>    "TAKE 947395 - Fixing potential deadlock in space allocation and
> >>>    freeing due to ENOSPC"
> >>>
> >>>git commit d210a28cd851082cec9b282443f8cc0e6fc09830.

.....

> >>Now we know what patch introduces the problem, we know where to look.
> >>Stay tuned...
> >
> >I've had a quick look at the above commit. I'm not yet certain that
> >everything is correct in terms of the semantics laid down in the
> >change or that enough blocks are reserved for btree splits , but I
> 
> I actually tried, naively, to bump up SET_ASIDE_BLOCKS from 8 to 32. I 
> won't claim to understand half of what's going on but I wondered whether 
> that might make the problem noticeably harder to reproduce at least, but 
> it had no effect ;-).

That was going to be my next question. ;)

At least that rules out a small error in the block reservation decision,
so I'm going to have  analyse all the code paths the mod introduced
and work out what is going wrong.

> >Stephane/Luciano - can you test the following patch (note: compile
> >tested only) and see if it fixes the problem?
> 
> I just tried it, unfortunately no effect. Stil went into a loop, on the 
> second attempt.

On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 02:10:59PM -0500, Luciano Chavez wrote:
> 
> Yes, unfortunetly it had no effect here either.

Thanks for trying. I'll get back to you both when I have something new
to report.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group

  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-08-23 23:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-08-22 20:01 Infinite loop in xfssyncd on full file system Stephane Doyon
2006-08-23  4:02 ` David Chinner
2006-08-23  4:48   ` David Chinner
2006-08-23 15:00     ` Stephane Doyon
2006-08-23 19:10       ` Luciano Chavez
2006-08-23 23:14       ` David Chinner [this message]
2006-08-28  7:23         ` David Chinner
2006-08-28 19:40           ` Luciano Chavez
2006-08-29 13:25             ` Stephane Doyon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20060823231429.GF807872@melbourne.sgi.com \
    --to=dgc@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=lnx1138@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=sdoyon@max-t.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.