From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Francis Moreau Subject: Re: Issue (as expected) when upgrading from 3.12 to 3.13.7 Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2014 14:08:57 +0200 Message-ID: <53380959.9030004@gmail.com> References: <20140330114747.GA15353@sucs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f171.google.com ([209.85.212.171]:57854 "EHLO mail-wi0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751507AbaC3MHk (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Mar 2014 08:07:40 -0400 Received: by mail-wi0-f171.google.com with SMTP id q5so2126487wiv.10 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 05:07:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140330114747.GA15353@sucs.org> Sender: linux-bcache-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org To: Sitsofe Wheeler , Kent Overstreet Cc: linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org On 03/30/2014 01:47 PM, Sitsofe Wheeler wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:53:12PM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote: >> >> As I was expecting I'm getting new issues with bcache after upgrading my >> kernel: >> >> [Mar30 12:24] INFO: task bcache_writebac:155 blocked for more than 120 >> seconds. >> [ +0.000007] Not tainted 3.13.7-1-ARCH #1 >> [ +0.000002] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" >> disables this message. >> [ +0.000003] bcache_writebac D 0000000000000000 0 155 2 >> 0x00000000 >> [ +0.000006] ffff8804049c5eb8 0000000000000046 ffff880405816c00 >> ffff8804049c5fd8 >> [ +0.000005] 0000000000014440 0000000000014440 ffff880405816c00 >> ffff8804049c5e38 >> [ +0.000004] ffffffff810925fa 24448b48e0d83524 fa83ffffee31e918 >> 0000000000000046 >> [ +0.000004] Call Trace: >> [ +0.000010] [] ? try_to_wake_up+0x1fa/0x2c0 >> [ +0.000006] [] ? default_wake_function+0x12/0x20 >> [ +0.000005] [] ? __wake_up_common+0x58/0x90 >> [ +0.000023] [] ? read_dirty_endio+0x60/0x60 [bcache] >> [ +0.000005] [] schedule+0x29/0x70 >> [ +0.000006] [] kthread+0xad/0xf0 >> [ +0.000005] [] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x180/0x180 >> [ +0.000005] [] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0 >> [ +0.000005] [] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x180/0x180 >> >> That's just sad to see how unstable was/is bcache sub system and I still >> don't understand why it was not marked as experimental. >> >> 3.12 was/is buggy when used with writeback mode, and I just had to live >> with cache-through. I tried to get some helps (and others too) but no >> answers. >> >> I read there were issue with 3.13, so I delayed my kernel upgrade as far >> I could due to this. I was hoping that issues were fixed in 3.13.x >> stable tree but apparently not. >> >> Hopefully this one will not be ignored. > > Francis - I've found it helps if you add all the relevant addresses > mentioned in https://www.kernel.org/doc/linux/MAINTAINERS . For this > mail I'm going to explicitly CC Kent to help this get noticed. > Additionally do you also see this problem with 3.14? > Sorry 3.14 is not available yet on my distro. Thanks