From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q58H34PI236650 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 12:03:04 -0500 Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 12:09:43 -0500 From: Ben Myers Subject: Re: Still seeing hangs in xlog_grant_log_space Message-ID: <20120608170943.GO4721@sgi.com> References: <20120605235447.GF22848@dastard> <4FCF5DB9.2000808@redhat.com> <20120607013531.GP22848@dastard> <4FD0B7B6.3000704@redhat.com> <20120608002826.GV4347@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120608002826.GV4347@dastard> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: Brian Foster , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 10:28:26AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: ... > And because the inodes pin the tail of the AIL, there's not enough > space in the log for the xfs_sync_worker to trigger a log force via > the dummy transaction, and hence we deadlock. > > FWIW, there's an argument that can be made here for an unconditional > log force in xfs_sync_worker() to provide a "get out gaol free" card > here. No kidding! http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-05/msg00312.html > The thing is, I would prefer that the filesystems hang so that > we find out about these issues and have to understand them and fix > them. IMO, there is nothing harder to detect and debug than short > duration, temporary stalls of the filesystem... I agree.. such a patch is not for general consumption. We want to fix the actual problem, not work around it with a prod on a timer. ;) Regards, Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs