* [PATCH 0/2] xfs: minor kernel logging updates @ 2015-02-23 19:13 Eric Sandeen 2015-02-23 19:15 ` [PATCH 1/2] xfs: log unmount events on console Eric Sandeen 2015-02-23 19:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfs: clarify async write failure ratelimit message Eric Sandeen 0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Eric Sandeen @ 2015-02-23 19:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xfs-oss Two very minor changes to error logging that I wished for when doing some debugging ... (not xfs logging ... dmesg "logging" ...) -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/2] xfs: log unmount events on console 2015-02-23 19:13 [PATCH 0/2] xfs: minor kernel logging updates Eric Sandeen @ 2015-02-23 19:15 ` Eric Sandeen 2015-02-23 20:49 ` Christoph Hellwig 2015-02-23 19:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfs: clarify async write failure ratelimit message Eric Sandeen 1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Eric Sandeen @ 2015-02-23 19:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss There are times, when doing triage and forensics, that we would like to know whether a filesystem was unmounted, or if the plug was pulled without a clean unmount. Log unmounts at the same level (NOTICE) as we log mounts. Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> --- diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c index 8fcc4cc..dd40d25 100644 --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c @@ -1039,6 +1039,7 @@ xfs_fs_put_super( { struct xfs_mount *mp = XFS_M(sb); + xfs_notice(mp, "Unmounting Filesystem"); xfs_filestream_unmount(mp); xfs_unmountfs(mp); _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: log unmount events on console 2015-02-23 19:15 ` [PATCH 1/2] xfs: log unmount events on console Eric Sandeen @ 2015-02-23 20:49 ` Christoph Hellwig 2015-02-23 20:53 ` Eric Sandeen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2015-02-23 20:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss Oh well, even more spam during xfstest runs :) _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: log unmount events on console 2015-02-23 20:49 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2015-02-23 20:53 ` Eric Sandeen 2015-02-23 21:06 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Eric Sandeen @ 2015-02-23 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss On 2/23/15 2:49 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Oh well, even more spam during xfstest runs :) Heh, but no review...? I could be talked out of it, if people think it's not useful enough. -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: log unmount events on console 2015-02-23 20:53 ` Eric Sandeen @ 2015-02-23 21:06 ` Christoph Hellwig 2015-02-24 11:53 ` Brian Foster 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2015-02-23 21:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 02:53:04PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 2/23/15 2:49 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Oh well, even more spam during xfstest runs :) > > Heh, but no review...? > > I could be talked out of it, if people think it's not useful > enough. I can't really get excited enough either way to give a review or nak.. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: log unmount events on console 2015-02-23 21:06 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2015-02-24 11:53 ` Brian Foster 2015-02-24 12:51 ` Dave Chinner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Brian Foster @ 2015-02-24 11:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Eric Sandeen, Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 01:06:29PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 02:53:04PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > On 2/23/15 2:49 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Oh well, even more spam during xfstest runs :) > > > > Heh, but no review...? > > > > I could be talked out of it, if people think it's not useful > > enough. > > I can't really get excited enough either way to give a review or nak.. > Heh, what verbosity is xfs_notice()? Maybe using debug level would be better? Brian > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@oss.sgi.com > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: log unmount events on console 2015-02-24 11:53 ` Brian Foster @ 2015-02-24 12:51 ` Dave Chinner 2015-02-24 13:03 ` Brian Foster 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Dave Chinner @ 2015-02-24 12:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Brian Foster; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Eric Sandeen, Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 06:53:25AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 01:06:29PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 02:53:04PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > > On 2/23/15 2:49 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > Oh well, even more spam during xfstest runs :) > > > > > > Heh, but no review...? > > > > > > I could be talked out of it, if people think it's not useful > > > enough. > > > > I can't really get excited enough either way to give a review or nak.. > > > > Heh, what verbosity is xfs_notice()? Maybe using debug level would be > better? The context Eric and I wanted to see this was when triaging bugs on production systems. e.g. to know if someone unmounted a shut down filesystem and tried to repair it before rebooting the system... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: log unmount events on console 2015-02-24 12:51 ` Dave Chinner @ 2015-02-24 13:03 ` Brian Foster 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Brian Foster @ 2015-02-24 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dave Chinner; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Eric Sandeen, Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:51:20PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 06:53:25AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 01:06:29PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 02:53:04PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > > > On 2/23/15 2:49 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > > Oh well, even more spam during xfstest runs :) > > > > > > > > Heh, but no review...? > > > > > > > > I could be talked out of it, if people think it's not useful > > > > enough. > > > > > > I can't really get excited enough either way to give a review or nak.. > > > > > > > Heh, what verbosity is xfs_notice()? Maybe using debug level would be > > better? > > The context Eric and I wanted to see this was when triaging bugs on > production systems. e.g. to know if someone unmounted a shut down > filesystem and tried to repair it before rebooting the system... > I guess that makes sense on a clean reboot, less so if the shutdown is a rootfs and leads to a panic or something of that sort (and what does a umount matter once the fs is shutdown?). Anyways, it's not a common operation and if the extra xfstests logging is the most significant tradeoff then it seems harmless to me: Reviewed-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@fromorbit.com > > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@oss.sgi.com > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] xfs: clarify async write failure ratelimit message 2015-02-23 19:13 [PATCH 0/2] xfs: minor kernel logging updates Eric Sandeen 2015-02-23 19:15 ` [PATCH 1/2] xfs: log unmount events on console Eric Sandeen @ 2015-02-23 19:19 ` Eric Sandeen 2015-02-23 20:49 ` Christoph Hellwig 1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Eric Sandeen @ 2015-02-23 19:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss Today, when the "failing async writes" get ratelimited, we see: XFS:: 62836 callbacks suppressed Aside from the extra ":" it's not entirely clear which message is being suppressed, especially if other messages or ratelimits are happening at the same time. Clarify this as i.e.: XFS (dm-11): Failing async write on buffer block 0x140090. Retrying async write. XFS: Failing async write: 62836 callbacks suppressed Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> --- I ... don't *think* this is abuse of __ratelimit(), is it? diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c index 4751c5f..08f315d 100644 --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c @@ -537,9 +537,9 @@ xfs_buf_item_push( /* has a previous flush failed due to IO errors? */ if ((bp->b_flags & XBF_WRITE_FAIL) && - ___ratelimit(&xfs_buf_write_fail_rl_state, "XFS:")) { + ___ratelimit(&xfs_buf_write_fail_rl_state, "XFS: Failing async write")) { xfs_warn(bp->b_target->bt_mount, -"Detected failing async write on buffer block 0x%llx. Retrying async write.", +"Failing async write on buffer block 0x%llx. Retrying async write.", (long long)bp->b_bn); } _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: clarify async write failure ratelimit message 2015-02-23 19:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfs: clarify async write failure ratelimit message Eric Sandeen @ 2015-02-23 20:49 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2015-02-23 20:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss Looks good, Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-02-24 13:03 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-02-23 19:13 [PATCH 0/2] xfs: minor kernel logging updates Eric Sandeen 2015-02-23 19:15 ` [PATCH 1/2] xfs: log unmount events on console Eric Sandeen 2015-02-23 20:49 ` Christoph Hellwig 2015-02-23 20:53 ` Eric Sandeen 2015-02-23 21:06 ` Christoph Hellwig 2015-02-24 11:53 ` Brian Foster 2015-02-24 12:51 ` Dave Chinner 2015-02-24 13:03 ` Brian Foster 2015-02-23 19:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfs: clarify async write failure ratelimit message Eric Sandeen 2015-02-23 20:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
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.