All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>
To: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/13] xfs: xfs_sync_data is redundant.
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 16:31:36 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <506A0BB8.8090204@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5069F9B0.50804@redhat.com>

On 10/01/12 15:14, Brian Foster wrote:
<deletes by mt>
> Heads up... I was doing some testing against my eofblocks set rebased
> against this patchset and I'm reproducing a new 273 failure. The failure
> bisects down to this patch.
>
> With the bisection, I'm running xfs top of tree plus the following patch:
>
> xfs: only update the last_sync_lsn when a transaction completes
>
> ... and patches 1-6 of this set on top of that. i.e.:
>
> xfs: xfs_sync_data is redundant.
> xfs: Bring some sanity to log unmounting
> xfs: sync work is now only periodic log work
> xfs: don't run the sync work if the filesystem is read-only
> xfs: rationalise xfs_mount_wq users
> xfs: xfs_syncd_stop must die
> xfs: only update the last_sync_lsn when a transaction completes
> xfs: Make inode32 a remountable option
>
> This is on a 16p (according to /proc/cpuinfo) x86-64 system with 32GB
> RAM. The test and scratch volumes are both 500GB lvm volumes on top of a
> hardware raid. I haven't looked into this at all yet but I wanted to
> drop it on the list for now. The 273 output is attached.
>
> Brian

  <deletes by mt>
>
>
> 273.out.bad
>
>
> QA output created by 273
> ------------------------------
> start the workload
> ------------------------------
> _porter 31 not complete
> _porter 79 not complete
> _porter 149 not complete_porter 74 not complete
> _porter 161 not complete
> _porter 54 not complete
> _porter 98 not complete
> _porter 99 not complete
> _porter 167 not complete
> _porter 76 not complete
> _porter 45 not complete
> _porter 152 not complete
> _porter 173 not complete_porter 24 not complete

  <deletes by mt>

I see it too on a single machine. It looks like an interaction between 
patch 06 and the "...update the last_sync_lsn...".

I like the "...update the last_sync_lsn ..." patch because it fixes the 
"xlog_verify_tail_lsn: tail wrapped" and "xlog_verify_tail_lsn: ran out 
of log space" messages that I am getting on that machine.

--Mark.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2012-10-01 21:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-09-28  4:44 [PATCH V3 00/13] xfs: remove the xfssyncd mess Dave Chinner
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 01/13] xfs: xfs_syncd_stop must die Dave Chinner
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 02/13] xfs: rationalise xfs_mount_wq users Dave Chinner
2012-09-28 12:27   ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 03/13] xfs: don't run the sync work if the filesystem is read-only Dave Chinner
2012-09-28 12:27   ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 04/13] xfs: sync work is now only periodic log work Dave Chinner
2012-09-28 12:31   ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 05/13] xfs: Bring some sanity to log unmounting Dave Chinner
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 06/13] xfs: xfs_sync_data is redundant Dave Chinner
2012-09-28 12:34   ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-10-01 17:44     ` Ben Myers
2012-10-02  0:14       ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-02 19:39         ` Ben Myers
2012-09-28 21:44   ` Mark Tinguely
2012-10-01 20:14   ` Brian Foster
2012-10-01 21:31     ` Mark Tinguely [this message]
2012-10-02  0:10     ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-02  0:44       ` Brian Foster
2012-10-02 13:01         ` Brian Foster
2012-10-02 20:51           ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-02 21:13             ` Brian Foster
2012-10-04  0:05             ` Ben Myers
2012-10-04  1:07               ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-02 13:22       ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-10-02 20:24         ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-02 20:25     ` Ben Myers
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 07/13] xfs: syncd workqueue is no more Dave Chinner
2012-09-28 12:35   ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-09-28 18:17   ` Mark Tinguely
2012-10-01 17:54     ` Ben Myers
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 08/13] xfs: xfs_sync_fsdata is redundant Dave Chinner
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 09/13] xfs: move xfs_quiesce_attr() into xfs_super.c Dave Chinner
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 10/13] xfs: xfs_quiesce_attr() should quiesce the log like unmount Dave Chinner
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 11/13] xfs: rename xfs_sync.[ch] to xfs_icache.[ch] Dave Chinner
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 12/13] xfs: move inode locking functions to xfs_inode.c Dave Chinner
2012-09-28  4:44 ` [PATCH 13/13] xfs: remove xfs_iget.c Dave Chinner

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=506A0BB8.8090204@sgi.com \
    --to=tinguely@sgi.com \
    --cc=bfoster@redhat.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.