Re: Bcache upstreaming

[Mike Snitzer <snitzer-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On Thu, Jan 10 2013 at 11:47am -0500,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 09 2013 at 11:12am -0500,
> Mike Snitzer <snitzer-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> 
> > (take3 with feeling.. I reverted to the gmail's old compose so all
> > should be right in my plain-text gmail world... apologies to Kent and
> > dm-devel for the redundant messages)
> > 
> > Hey Kent,
> > 
> > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Kent Overstreet <koverstreet-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > > I've (finally!) got a bcache branch hacked up that ought to be suitable
> > > to go upstream, possibly in staging initially.
> > >
> > > It's currently closer to the dev branch than the stable branch, plus
> > > some additional minor changes to make it all more self contained. The
> > > code has seen a decent amount of testing and I think it's in good shape,
> > > but I'd like it if it could see a bit more testing before I see about
> > > pushing it upstream.
> > >
> > > If anyone wants to try it out, checkout the bcache-for-staging branch.
> > > It's against Linux 3.7.
> > 
> > I pulled your 'bcache-for-staging' code into a 'dm-devel-cache-bcache'
> > branch on my github:
> > https://github.com/snitm/linux
> > 
> > Purpose is to have a single kernel to compare dm-cache and bcache.  My
> > branch is against 3.8-rc2.  While importing your code I needed the
> > following change to get bcache to compile:
> > https://github.com/snitm/linux/commit/400b1257e93975864fd6c4b827537a0234551253
> > 
> > It now builds without issue but I haven't tested the resulting bcache
> 
> Just tried to use bcache at it locked up:

And I get the same lockup when I try v3.7 with the following config:

CONFIG_BCACHE=m
# CONFIG_BCACHE_DEBUG is not set
# CONFIG_BCACHE_EDEBUG is not set
# CONFIG_BCACHE_CLOSURES_DEBUG is not set
# CONFIG_CGROUP_BCACHE is not set