From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Sachin Sant <sachinp@in.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: Next March 25: Boot failure on powerpc [recursive locking detected]
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 07:42:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090327064208.GQ27476@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090327165624.47a29945.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
On Fri, Mar 27 2009, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 08:50:03 -0500 James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 12:04 +0530, Sachin Sant wrote:
> > > Sachin Sant wrote:
> > > > Today's next failed to boot on a powerpc box
> > > > (Power6 blade IBM,7998-61X) with following recursive locking message.
> > > >
> > > > =============================================
> > > > [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> > > > 2.6.29-next-20090325 #1
> > > After bisecting the failure seems to be because of the following
> > > patch from James ( block: move SCSI timeout check into block )
> > >
> > > http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8017/
> > >
> > > If i back out the above mentioned patch, the machine boots fine
> > > without any problems.
> >
> > Yes, that patch already got dropped for other reasons:
> >
> > http://marc.info/?t=123740773700002
> >
> > I'm going to see if I can redo it in a better way, since moving this
> > type of timeout checking from scsi to block is a useful generalisation.
>
> I will revert it from next-20090327 as well as it is still in the
> for-next branch of the block tree.
I'll update for-next, sorry about that. I had dropped it from
for-2.6.30, but forgot to update akpm/next branches.
--
Jens Axboe
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Next March 25: Boot failure on powerpc [recursive locking detected]
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 07:42:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090327064208.GQ27476@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090327165624.47a29945.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
On Fri, Mar 27 2009, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 08:50:03 -0500 James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 12:04 +0530, Sachin Sant wrote:
> > > Sachin Sant wrote:
> > > > Today's next failed to boot on a powerpc box
> > > > (Power6 blade IBM,7998-61X) with following recursive locking message.
> > > >
> > > > =============================================
> > > > [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> > > > 2.6.29-next-20090325 #1
> > > After bisecting the failure seems to be because of the following
> > > patch from James ( block: move SCSI timeout check into block )
> > >
> > > http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8017/
> > >
> > > If i back out the above mentioned patch, the machine boots fine
> > > without any problems.
> >
> > Yes, that patch already got dropped for other reasons:
> >
> > http://marc.info/?t=123740773700002
> >
> > I'm going to see if I can redo it in a better way, since moving this
> > type of timeout checking from scsi to block is a useful generalisation.
>
> I will revert it from next-20090327 as well as it is still in the
> for-next branch of the block tree.
I'll update for-next, sorry about that. I had dropped it from
for-2.6.30, but forgot to update akpm/next branches.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-27 6:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-25 8:12 linux-next: Tree for March 25 Stephen Rothwell
2009-03-25 11:34 ` Next March 25: net/netfilter/xt_LED build failure Sachin Sant
2009-03-25 11:43 ` Next March 25: staging/epl build break Sachin Sant
2009-03-25 16:04 ` Randy Dunlap
2009-03-25 11:52 ` Next March 25 : arch/x86/kernel : k8_northbridges Sachin Sant
2009-03-25 14:13 ` Next March 25: Boot failure on powerpc [recursive locking detected] Sachin Sant
2009-03-26 6:34 ` Sachin Sant
2009-03-26 6:34 ` Sachin Sant
2009-03-26 13:50 ` James Bottomley
2009-03-26 13:50 ` James Bottomley
2009-03-27 5:56 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-03-27 5:56 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-03-27 6:42 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2009-03-27 6:42 ` Jens Axboe
2009-03-27 6:53 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-03-27 6:53 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-03-25 16:06 ` linux-next: Tree for March 25 (drivers/media/video/cx231xx) Randy Dunlap
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=20090327064208.GQ27476@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=sachinp@in.ibm.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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.