From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mingming Cao Subject: Re: qla2xxx BUG: workqueue leaked lock or atomic Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 12:05:11 -0800 Message-ID: <1173297911.3769.3.camel@dyn9047017103.beaverton.ibm.com> References: <20070226133153.GC4095@skl-net.de> <20070226182617.GC9968@andrew-vasquezs-computer.local> <20070227101100.GA22572@skl-net.de> <20070227185134.GJ20397@andrew-vasquezs-computer.local> <20070228151829.GI22572@skl-net.de> <20070228153722.GJ22572@skl-net.de> <20070306203952.471218df.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070307170955.GA4252@skl-net.de> <20070307114525.08265c33.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Reply-To: cmm@us.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andre Noll , Andrew Vasquez , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, James Bottomley , Jens Axboe , Alasdair G Kergon , Adrian Bunk , "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" To: Andrew Morton Return-path: Received: from e36.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.154]:40833 "EHLO e36.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2992534AbXCGUFQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2007 15:05:16 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20070307114525.08265c33.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 11:45 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 18:09:55 +0100 Andre Noll wrote: > > > On 20:39, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:37:22 +0100 Andre Noll wrote: > > > > > > > On 16:18, Andre Noll wrote: > > > > > > > > > With 2.6.21-rc2 I am unable to reproduce this BUG message. However, > > > > > writing to both raid systems at the same time via lvm still locks up > > > > > the system within minutes. > > > > > > > > Screenshot of the resulting kernel panic: > > > > > > > > http://systemlinux.org/~maan/shots/kernel-panic-21-rc2-huangho2.png > > > > > > > > > > It died in CFQ. Please try a different IO scheduler. Use something > > > like > > > > > > echo deadline > /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler > > > > > > This could still be the old qla2xxx bug, or it could be a new qla2xxx bug, > > > or it could be a block bug, or it could be an LVM bug. > > > > OK. I'm running with deadline right now. But I guess this kernel > > panic was caused by an LVM bug because lockdep reported problems with > > LVM. Nobody responded to my bug report on the LVM mailing list (see > > http://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-lvm/2007-February/msg00102.html). > > > > Non-working snapshots and no help from the mailing list convinced me > > to ditch the lvm setup [1] in favour of linear software raid. This > > means I can't do lvm-related tests any more. > > Sigh. > > > BTW: Are ext3 filesystem sizes greater than 8T now officially > > supported? > > I think so, but I don't know how much 16TB testing developers and > distros are doing - perhaps the linux-ext4 denizens can tell us? > - IBM has done some testing (dbench, fsstress, fsx, tiobench, iozone etc) on 10TB ext3, I think RedHat and BULL have done similar test on >8TB ext3 too. Mingming