From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q5LGYDka094469 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2012 11:34:13 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id hLvGVccSWiKfhsAY (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2012 09:34:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:34:09 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [regression] stack overflow in xfs_buf_iodone_callbacks Message-ID: <20120621163409.GA7897@infradead.org> References: <20120621091803.GB10673@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120621091803.GB10673@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: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 07:18:03PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > Folks, > > I just had a stack overflow in the delayed write buffer error > handling with a shut down filesystem: I've looked at this a bit more, and it seems the effect really can't be an XFS shutdown. We never do the shutdown check inside xfs_buf_iorequest. The issue obviously is real, but could it be that you had an actual persistent I/O error on the underlying device? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs