From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mr85p00im-zteg06023901.me.com (mr85p00im-zteg06023901.me.com [17.58.23.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9F981D527 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2024 15:46:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=17.58.23.192 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706283975; cv=none; b=jiFe5OqCWfJbDyMQWTXzGTbjsU2wJ1Xksq8/6qGNJ/jC+CjnradqOfPvr3Dg9Af+NjZ5hkh0TRtP70zzJwD4uG4DwWWZYs/lZN9lBqXahPA0EXgD685K9rBKrvWk/0mWGQpUSDMicMZSDoc+Dklq4eB1bOhU3IarlP6miDT39BI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706283975; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5kf8tTxC0yiNRmCBDthAhZJGzsbO6k25ITijcAGsWTQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=VeRgT+3xMSt/1UBSGyMa2LWVMEjfLl4WreCBvOyvVU283wMaQ8SjpbgvscoW73Qa5NwcQXBU25KdE05byFXZOTTu3xtgrwEJJlsLufXHqx+rqiAy8rIvrK5nxZ4/OPQBYWoPfncUdmD4bYvXHZSA6aNjbQIy/a4DfYkQgTYuUo4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=danm.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=danm.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=danm.net header.i=@danm.net header.b=gQKChUco; arc=none smtp.client-ip=17.58.23.192 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=danm.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=danm.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=danm.net header.i=@danm.net header.b="gQKChUco" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=danm.net; s=sig1; t=1706283973; bh=5kf8tTxC0yiNRmCBDthAhZJGzsbO6k25ITijcAGsWTQ=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=gQKChUcoceWZ6jSCQJ6LYTZoNogu4NpF+edGmgqNXwmRet04DWyv7pP7hZfkn1oFJ /djtOWXNiLpmrY688KopFycF2sOJfyS10cPwFY7VErniHtURhSgcN0QcnCRZHuKlM+ PFaGapg0LYwEji8+Ug67L+tEKuytxr4tJ9JICGAoZexM+82PuOTdq9pDRVMH4o9rwu snXjAGpH0ZHTpeFWmjsTPn/UEIgR18AZOuP3hSMsa0DSbaBxHav3B54Q47wfVp+u88 G0qCzX95Qw+mah3SkhIr9MS2Ftn6Ik7T1WUEM8luslxjwSWxQ6xXiH1fsAKFNz6Uk5 ng1r103eHQBkA== Received: from hitch.danm.net (mr38p00im-dlb-asmtp-mailmevip.me.com [17.57.152.18]) by mr85p00im-zteg06023901.me.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ACF286E02D3; Fri, 26 Jan 2024 15:46:11 +0000 (UTC) From: Dan Moulding To: carlos@fisica.ufpr.br Cc: dan@danm.net, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, junxiao.bi@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, regressions@lists.linux.dev, song@kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, yukuai1@huaweicloud.com Subject: [REGRESSION] 6.7.1: md: raid5 hang and unresponsive system; successfully bisected Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 08:46:10 -0700 Message-ID: <20240126154610.24755-1-dan@danm.net> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0 In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Proofpoint-GUID: BcY4iSij5chVyVi4r0gaADDEYhZiD5Sd X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: BcY4iSij5chVyVi4r0gaADDEYhZiD5Sd X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.272,Aquarius:18.0.1011,Hydra:6.0.619,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2024-01-25_14,2024-01-25_01,2023-05-22_02 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=393 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 clxscore=1030 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2308100000 definitions=main-2401260116 > It's known that ext4 has these symptoms with parity raid. Interesting. I'm not aware of that problem. One of the systems that hit this hang has been running with ext4 on an MD RAID-5 array with every kernel since at least 5.1 and never had an issue until this regression. > To make sure it's a raid problem you should try another filesystem or > remount it with stripe=0. That's a good suggestion, so I switched it to use XFS. It can still reproduce the hang. Sounds like this is probably a different problem than the known ext4 one. Thanks, -- Dan