From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: JFFS2 deadlock with alloc_sem From: David Woodhouse To: Dave Kleikamp In-Reply-To: <1185888229.14534.13.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> References: <1185543729.13873.10.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> <1185557896.22352.4.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> <1185799508.3083.20.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1185813909.9523.42.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> <1185883827.3083.109.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1185888229.14534.13.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:23:26 +0100 Message-Id: <1185895406.3083.117.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Roberts Nathan-mcg31137 , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, ye janboe List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 08:23 -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote: > We had tried a similar patch, attached here, but it caused problems. > Maybe our patch is missing something. > > >From the bug report: > ----------------------------- > Built and ran the 2nd patch (attachment 28493 [edit]). Results are similar > as before, jffs2 runs for a little while, but soon complains there's > already data at the point where it intends to write. > > ARGH. About to write node to 0x00140010 on flash, but there's data already > there: > 0x00140010: 19 85 e0 02 00 00 00 ac 0a 3e 48 74 00 00 00 74 Hm, I think that's probably a _separate_ problem, which you happened to exacerbate. I don't see how it's related to f->sem locking. -- dwmw2