Re: [PATCH 0/3] NFS regression in 2.6.26?, "task blocked for more than 120 seconds"

Ian Campbell
2009-01-22T08:27:53Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1140 bytes --]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 16:26 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>
> > > (Merged now, so testing mainline as of today should work too.)
> >
> > The server isn't really a machine I want to test random kernels on,
> is
> > there some subset of those changesets which it would be useful for
> me to
> > pull back onto the 2.6.26 kernel I'm using to test? (I can most like
> > manage the backporting myself).
> >
> > These two look like the relevant ones to me but I'm not sure:
> > 22945e4a1c7454c97f5d8aee1ef526c83fef3223 svc: Clean up deferred
> requests on transport destruction
> > 69b6ba3712b796a66595cfaf0a5ab4dfe1cf964a SUNRPC: Ensure the server
> closes sockets in a timely fashion
> >
> > I think 69b6 was in the set of three I tested previously and the
> other
> > two turned into 2294?
>
> Yep, exactly.--b.

The client machine now has an uptime of ten days without error after
these two patches were applied to the server.

Thanks everybody,
Ian.

--
Ian Campbell

I used to think that the brain was the most wonderful organ in
my body. Then I realized who was telling me this.
-- Emo Phillips

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]