From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Elder Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] __remove_osd() vs lingering requests Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 11:49:54 -0600 Message-ID: <545A6342.4000404@ieee.org> References: <1415208804-10163-1-git-send-email-idryomov@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-ig0-f176.google.com ([209.85.213.176]:35356 "EHLO mail-ig0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751538AbaKERt4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Nov 2014 12:49:56 -0500 Received: by mail-ig0-f176.google.com with SMTP id l13so9962417iga.9 for ; Wed, 05 Nov 2014 09:49:55 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1415208804-10163-1-git-send-email-idryomov@redhat.com> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ilya Dryomov , ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org On 11/05/2014 11:33 AM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: > Hello, > > These are fixes for the problem I found while trying to reproduce > recently reopened http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/5429. I'm pretty sure > this is what was reported in http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/8568 too. > The exact BUG_ON() it points to is no longer there, but I checked with > an older kernel and the reproducer I have for this triggered it. > > Thanks, > > Ilya All three of these look good to me. The interactions with these lists has always been a bit too tricky; you've done a lot to make sense of them. And I'm sure there are other BUG_ON() (or rbd_assert()) calls that can be tamed--either removed, changed to warnings, or changed to simply return errors where possible. Reviewed-by: Alex Elder > > > Ilya Dryomov (3): > libceph: unlink from o_linger_requests when clearing r_osd > libceph: clear r_req_lru_item in __unregister_linger_request() > libceph: change from BUG to WARN for __remove_osd() asserts > > net/ceph/osd_client.c | 7 +++++-- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >