From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: CAI Qian <caiqian@redhat.com>
Cc: psusi@ubuntu.com, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5 running xfstests case #78]
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 13:41:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130403114142.GP4667@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130402094834.GA4667@kernel.dk>
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02 2013, CAI Qian wrote:
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Jens Axboe" <axboe@kernel.dk>
> > > To: "CAI Qian" <caiqian@redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "Dave Chinner" <david@fromorbit.com>, xfs@oss.sgi.com, "LKML" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 5:00:47 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5 running xfstests case #78]
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 02 2013, CAI Qian wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Jens Axboe" <axboe@kernel.dk>
> > > > > To: "Dave Chinner" <david@fromorbit.com>
> > > > > Cc: "CAI Qian" <caiqian@redhat.com>, xfs@oss.sgi.com, "LKML"
> > > > > <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 3:30:35 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5
> > > > > running xfstests case #78]
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > > > > > [Added jens Axboe to CC]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 02:08:49AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:
> > > > > > > > Saw on almost all the servers range from x64, ppc64 and s390x with
> > > > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > > 3.9-rc5 and xfsprogs-3.1.10. Never caught this in 3.9-rc4, so looks
> > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > something new broke this. Log is here with sysrq debug info.
> > > > > > > > http://people.redhat.com/qcai/stable/log
> > > > > >
> > > > > > CAI Qian, can you try and back the below out and test again?
> > > > >
> > > > > Nevermind, it's clearly that one. The below should improve the
> > > > > situation, but it's not pretty. A better fix would be to allow
> > > > > auto-deletion even if PART_NO_SCAN is set.
> > > > Jens, when compiled the mainline (up to fefcdbe) with this patch,
> > > > it error-ed out,
> > >
> > > Looks like I sent the wrong one, updated below.
> > The patch works well. Thanks!
>
> Thanks for testing! I don't particularly like this stuff in loop,
> though. It's quite nasty and depends on other behaviour. It would be
> prettier if we just had rescan_partitions() do the right thing, and only
> drop partitions and not rescan if NO_PART_SCAN is set.
>
> Ala the below, dropping the loop change and implementing that change in
> the core code. Phillip, can you check whether this does the right thing
> for your bug too?
Phillip? I'm going to revert the loop change asap, so if you want this
fixed for 3.10, it's about that time to test it out.
--
Jens Axboe
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: CAI Qian <caiqian@redhat.com>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
xfs@oss.sgi.com, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
psusi@ubuntu.com
Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5 running xfstests case #78]
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 13:41:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130403114142.GP4667@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130402094834.GA4667@kernel.dk>
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02 2013, CAI Qian wrote:
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Jens Axboe" <axboe@kernel.dk>
> > > To: "CAI Qian" <caiqian@redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "Dave Chinner" <david@fromorbit.com>, xfs@oss.sgi.com, "LKML" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 5:00:47 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5 running xfstests case #78]
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 02 2013, CAI Qian wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Jens Axboe" <axboe@kernel.dk>
> > > > > To: "Dave Chinner" <david@fromorbit.com>
> > > > > Cc: "CAI Qian" <caiqian@redhat.com>, xfs@oss.sgi.com, "LKML"
> > > > > <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 3:30:35 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5
> > > > > running xfstests case #78]
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > > > > > [Added jens Axboe to CC]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 02:08:49AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:
> > > > > > > > Saw on almost all the servers range from x64, ppc64 and s390x with
> > > > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > > 3.9-rc5 and xfsprogs-3.1.10. Never caught this in 3.9-rc4, so looks
> > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > something new broke this. Log is here with sysrq debug info.
> > > > > > > > http://people.redhat.com/qcai/stable/log
> > > > > >
> > > > > > CAI Qian, can you try and back the below out and test again?
> > > > >
> > > > > Nevermind, it's clearly that one. The below should improve the
> > > > > situation, but it's not pretty. A better fix would be to allow
> > > > > auto-deletion even if PART_NO_SCAN is set.
> > > > Jens, when compiled the mainline (up to fefcdbe) with this patch,
> > > > it error-ed out,
> > >
> > > Looks like I sent the wrong one, updated below.
> > The patch works well. Thanks!
>
> Thanks for testing! I don't particularly like this stuff in loop,
> though. It's quite nasty and depends on other behaviour. It would be
> prettier if we just had rescan_partitions() do the right thing, and only
> drop partitions and not rescan if NO_PART_SCAN is set.
>
> Ala the below, dropping the loop change and implementing that change in
> the core code. Phillip, can you check whether this does the right thing
> for your bug too?
Phillip? I'm going to revert the loop change asap, so if you want this
fixed for 3.10, it's about that time to test it out.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-03 11:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1462091996.435156.1364882416199.JavaMail.root@redhat.com>
2013-04-02 6:08 ` xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5 running xfstests case #78 CAI Qian
2013-04-02 6:08 ` CAI Qian
2013-04-02 7:05 ` Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5 running xfstests case #78] Dave Chinner
2013-04-02 7:05 ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-02 7:19 ` Jens Axboe
2013-04-02 7:19 ` Jens Axboe
2013-04-02 7:30 ` Jens Axboe
2013-04-02 7:30 ` Jens Axboe
2013-04-02 8:39 ` CAI Qian
2013-04-02 8:39 ` CAI Qian
2013-04-02 9:00 ` Jens Axboe
2013-04-02 9:00 ` Jens Axboe
2013-04-02 9:31 ` CAI Qian
2013-04-02 9:31 ` CAI Qian
2013-04-02 9:48 ` Jens Axboe
2013-04-02 9:48 ` Jens Axboe
2013-04-03 11:41 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2013-04-03 11:41 ` Jens Axboe
2013-04-03 15:41 ` Phillip Susi
2013-04-03 15:41 ` Phillip Susi
2013-04-04 20:30 ` Phillip Susi
2013-04-04 20:30 ` Phillip Susi
2013-04-09 6:55 ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-09 6:55 ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-09 7:01 ` Jens Axboe
2013-04-09 7:01 ` Jens Axboe
2013-04-09 7:08 ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-09 7:08 ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-10 7:24 ` Jens Axboe
2013-04-10 7:24 ` Jens Axboe
2013-05-28 14:51 ` Phillip Susi
2013-05-28 14:51 ` Phillip Susi
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=20130403114142.GP4667@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=caiqian@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=psusi@ubuntu.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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.