From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id n1CMHUsq088983 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 16:17:30 -0600 Received: from web30203.mail.mud.yahoo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with SMTP id F3A35119102 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 14:16:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from web30203.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web30203.mail.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.69.50]) by cuda.sgi.com with SMTP id BuBHIJ8bW41aoBbX for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 14:16:54 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3453.33822.qm@web30203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 14:16:53 -0800 (PST) From: Subject: Re: BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#1! In-Reply-To: <49949E64.8020904@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 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: Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Guys, Thank you for taking the time to write. Having said where I stand and we are kind of on the same page. Is there something I can expect which would put me on a track of nailing down the problem. It maybe a wild goose chase but something that I can start with would be much appreciated. Unfortunately there is no distro which gets closer to where mainline lives today. Reading the changelog there are several problems that I have already come across and has convincingly driven me to take on this task. Thanks, Rakesh --- Eric Sandeen wrote: > raksac@yahoo.com wrote: > > Well the problem is the older kernel XFS driver is > > buggy to such a large extent that there is data > loss > > even for data on rest should a power loss occur. > > > > With a newer version back port I can preserve the > > kernel version change since it becomes far more > > reaching to the other kernel components and they > have > > to move, to which ..... there is strong > reservation. > > > > Hope this gives you the perspective. > > It's totally understandable why you might want to do > it. > > It's also totally understandable why upstream > developers can't spend a > lot of time on your custom codebase. > > What you need, of course, is a distribution with > good support for xfs, > so you can make it Someone Else's Problem. :) > > -Eric > > > Thanks, > > Rakesh > > > > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs