From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: XFS <xfs@oss.sgi.com>, Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: xfstests: failure to umount ext4
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 10:45:24 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D8A1594.5060505@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=JvL6LoL=VOrHoiQKheqzDrVwOQtWAkumzaBk5@mail.gmail.com>
On 3/23/11 10:33 AM, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 3/23/11 9:36 AM, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I've been running xfstests on ext4 and I always get annoying failures to umount:
>>>>
>>>> 213 8s ... 31s
>>>> umount: /mnt/test/ext4: device is busy.
>>>> (In some cases useful info about processes that use
>>>> the device is found by lsof(8) or fuser(1))
>>>>
>>>> post 198 mostly fails to umount as well.
>>>> and post 124 always fails to umount.
>>>>
>>>> My server is Ubuntu 10.10, running kernel 2.6.38.
>>>>
>>>> Is there any known issue about this? because I could find it on google
>>>> or on the XFS list.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Has anyone seen these failures when running xfstests on ext4?
>>> My test and scratch partitions are dedicated for xfstests.
>>
>> I've not seen it, can you investigate with lsof etc?
>
> OK. I have not given complete information.
> It does not fail indefinably. I can umount the fs immediately after the failure.
> Only the test fails because fsck sees a mounted fs.
> There must be a bit of a delay in the umount that causes the problem.
>
>>
>> They both work for me on a quick test, anyway, on a .38
>> kernel.
>
> Problem existed for me in .37 as well. I don't think it is kernel (or
> fs) related.
> I think it is a system problem, but I fall short of ideas how to fix it.
>
>>
>> What are you using for your partitions under test?
>>
>
> Currently, I have /dev/sda5,6,7,8.
> I used to work with LVM, but lstat64 didn't like the /dev/mapper links,
> so I switched to raw partitions.
> Although I was puzzled that xfstests could not work over LVM partitions
> It could when I changed lstat64 to stat64, but then I changed it back
> thinking it was causing my problems.
I tried to fix lvm, once, but all the dev symlinks vs. mtab vs.
/proc/mounts was a rat's nest, and I gave up... :)
-Eric
>> -Eric
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Amir.
>>
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-23 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-23 14:36 xfstests: failure to umount ext4 Amir Goldstein
2011-03-23 14:57 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-03-23 15:33 ` Amir Goldstein
2011-03-23 15:45 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2011-03-29 9:01 ` Amir Goldstein
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=4D8A1594.5060505@redhat.com \
--to=sandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).