From: Timothy Shimmin <tes@sgi.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: "Mr. James W. Laferriere" <babydr@baby-dragons.com>,
linux-raid maillist <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: INFO: task pdflush:393 blocked for more than 120 seconds. & Call traces ... (fwd)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:25:35 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4885370F.9000301@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18565.6095.988483.628391@notabene.brown>
Neil Brown wrote:
> On Monday July 21, babydr@baby-dragons.com wrote:
>> INFO: task pdflush:393 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
>> "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
>> pdflush D c8209f80 4748 393 2
>> f75e5e58 00000046 f7f7ad50 c8209f80 f7f7a8a0 f75e5e24 c014fc57 00000000
>> f7f7a8a0 e5d0dd00 c8209f80 f75e4000 c0819e00 c8209f80 f7f7aaf4 f75e5e44
>> 00000286 f75e5e80 f510de30 f75e5e58 c0142233 f510de00 f75e5e80 f510de30
>> Call Trace:
>> [<c014fc57>] ? mark_held_locks+0x67/0x80
>> [<c0142233>] ? add_wait_queue+0x33/0x50
>> [<c03a7f85>] xfs_buf_wait_unpin+0xb5/0xe0
>> [<c0127a60>] ? default_wake_function+0x0/0x10
>> [<c0127a60>] ? default_wake_function+0x0/0x10
>> [<c03a84fb>] xfs_buf_iorequest+0x4b/0x80
>> [<c03adeee>] xfs_bdstrat_cb+0x3e/0x50
>> [<c03a495c>] xfs_bwrite+0x5c/0xe0
>> [<c039e941>] xfs_syncsub+0x121/0x2b0
>> [<c018a43b>] ? lock_super+0x1b/0x20
>> [<c018a43b>] ? lock_super+0x1b/0x20
>> [<c039e1d8>] xfs_sync+0x48/0x70
>> [<c03af833>] xfs_fs_write_super+0x23/0x30
>> [<c018a80f>] sync_supers+0xaf/0xc0
>
> Looks a lot like an XFS problem to me.
> Or at least, XFS people would be able to interpret this stack the
> best.
>
I presume if it is waiting in xfs_buf_wait_unpin() for a long
time (>2min) then maybe a journal-log io completion hasn't come
back to say that the matching buffer item has made to the ondisk log.
i.e the buffer hasn't been unpinned yet (pincount>0) which is supposed
to happen when its data hits the ondisk log.
>> [<c0169259>] wb_kupdate+0x29/0x100
>> [<c016a0cc>] ? __pdflush+0xcc/0x1a0
>> [<c016a0d2>] __pdflush+0xd2/0x1a0
>> [<c016a1a0>] ? pdflush+0x0/0x40
>> [<c016a1d1>] pdflush+0x31/0x40
>> [<c0169230>] ? wb_kupdate+0x0/0x100
>> [<c016a1a0>] ? pdflush+0x0/0x40
>> [<c0141e2c>] kthread+0x5c/0xa0
>> [<c0141dd0>] ? kthread+0x0/0xa0
>> [<c0103d67>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10
>> =======================
>> 2 locks held by pdflush/393:
>> #0: (&type->s_umount_key#17){----}, at: [<c018a7b2>] sync_supers+0x52/0xc0
>> #1: (&type->s_lock_key#7){--..}, at: [<c018a43b>] lock_super+0x1b/0x20
>>
>> ...snip... Repeats of above message ad-infintum .
>
>
> Hmm... I guess I clipped a bit too much for our XFS friends to know
> the context.
> bonnie is being run on an XFS filesystem on md/raid6. and it gets
> this warning a lot and essentially hangs.
>
Just for the record,
in rc-9 we hadn't removed the QUEUE_ORDERED tag check yet and
so I presume for md/raid6, barriers will be disabled.
So barrier writes on the log won't be being issued.
I don't see that as anything to do with the problem here -
that is more of an issue on replay if we have the cache on
and no barrier support - I just thought I'd mention it.
--Tim
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-22 1:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-21 17:40 INFO: task pdflush:393 blocked for more than 120 seconds. & Call traces ... (fwd) Mr. James W. Laferriere
2008-07-21 18:17 ` Randy Dunlap
2008-07-21 23:12 ` Neil Brown
2008-07-21 23:43 ` Mr. James W. Laferriere
2008-07-22 0:57 ` Richard Scobie
2008-07-22 2:20 ` Dave Chinner
2008-07-27 1:47 ` i/O Thruput to devices in a raidset not even Mr. James W. Laferriere
2008-07-22 1:25 ` Timothy Shimmin [this message]
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=4885370F.9000301@sgi.com \
--to=tes@sgi.com \
--cc=babydr@baby-dragons.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--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.