Re: Hi! I've noticed that kernel.org advertises 2.6.28 as "The latest stable version of the Linux kernel is".

Re: Hi! I've noticed that kernel.org advertises 2.6.28 as "The latest stable version of the Linux kernel is".

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 12:39:55PM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> -- Copying several rather big files (~ 25--45 GiB) from XFS on LVM-2
> on MDraid partition to another one, I had the system rebooted both
> with 2.6.28 and 2.6.27.10 (accomplished using 2.6.24.7-rt(sic!)25). As
> you probably understand, that's the case you even can't trace where's
> the problem, at least on a desktop with GUI, not on server with plain
> text display. Although, I'm afraid even text display wouldn't had a
> chance to show anything, tracing that problem.

You don't have 4K_STACKs enabled by default, do you? 

And instead of these rants bug reports would be more useful.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: Hi! I've noticed that kernel.org advertises 2.6.28 as "The latest stable version of the Linux kernel is".

[Igor Podlesny]

2008/12/29 Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>:
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 12:39:55PM +0700, Igor Podlesny wrote:
>> -- Copying several rather big files (~ 25--45 GiB) from XFS on LVM-2
>> on MDraid partition to another one, I had the system rebooted both
>> with 2.6.28 and 2.6.27.10 (accomplished using 2.6.24.7-rt(sic!)25). As
>> you probably understand, that's the case you even can't trace where's
>> the problem, at least on a desktop with GUI, not on server with plain
>> text display. Although, I'm afraid even text display wouldn't had a
>> chance to show anything, tracing that problem.
>
> You don't have 4K_STACKs enabled by default, do you?

	x86_64, so it's not applicable.
	
	I see you've included XFS guys, but that's hard to guess which
sub-system is related to that crash, cause it's a stacked construction
XFS/LVM-2/Linux Software RAID/sata_nv. Also, I've found there were
some complaints bout netfilter's ipt_recent, which I was using, so
I've decided to turn it off and see.
>
> And instead of these rants bug reports would be more useful.
>
	Yeah, I'll try to get backtraces, using null-modem cable, but alas, I
don't have it yet. Nowadays it's not a thing easy to buy at a computer
store. Also, my message (feedback) was written due to concerns bout
quality degradation I saw. May be I was mistaken or not, but I felt
it's better to talk about it to people who really cared and knew.

-- 
End of message. Next message?

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: Hi! I've noticed that kernel.org advertises 2.6.28 as "The latest stable version of the Linux kernel is".

[Sitsofe Wheeler]

Igor Podlesny wrote:
> 	Yeah, I'll try to get backtraces, using null-modem cable, but alas, I

Have you tried compiling your kernel with extended checks 
(CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL in the Kernel hacking menu)? There are debug 
poisoning options too. Sometimes this can flush out problems before they 
become fatal...

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: Hi! I've noticed that kernel.org advertises 2.6.28 as "The latest stable version of the Linux kernel is".

[Igor Podlesny]

2008/12/29 Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@yahoo.com>:
> Igor Podlesny wrote:
>>
>>        Yeah, I'll try to get backtraces, using null-modem cable, but alas,
>> I
>
> Have you tried compiling your kernel with extended checks
> (CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL in the Kernel hacking menu)? There are debug poisoning
> options too. Sometimes this can flush out problems before they become
> fatal...
>
2.6.28's:

# CONFIG_DEBUG_DRIVER is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_DEVRES is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_FS is not set
CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL=y
CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ=y
# CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS is not set
CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT=y
# CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK_SLEEP is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKING_API_SELFTESTS is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_KOBJECT is not set
CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE=y
# CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_WRITECOUNT is not set
CONFIG_DEBUG_MEMORY_INIT=y
CONFIG_DEBUG_LIST=y
# CONFIG_DEBUG_SG is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_BLOCK_EXT_DEVT is not set
CONFIG_DEBUG_STACKOVERFLOW=y
# CONFIG_DEBUG_STACK_USAGE is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS is not set
CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA=y
# CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA_TEST is not set
# CONFIG_DEBUG_NX_TEST is not set

	-- Nothing in dmesg; when it freezes or reboots, even if there're
some messages on console, they wouldn't be seen in graphics mode. As I
said, now my suspicion is netfilter's ipt_recent; I've turned it off
and now waiting. Another kernel I'm using now (2.6.24-ovz-006.5+) is
built with stack usage reporting; that's the latest stack depth
report:

[   54.312696] modprobe used greatest stack depth: 3904 bytes left

	Dunno whether it's rather low or ok.

-- 
End of message. Next message?

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: Hi! I've noticed that kernel.org advertises 2.6.28 as "The latest stable version of the Linux kernel is".

[David Newall]

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> instead of these rants bug reports would be more useful.

Igor didn't rant, not even a little bit, and it reflects poorly on you
that you engage in hyperbole rather than hear his story.  In fact, or at
least in my opinion as a computer programmer with 30 years experience,
he's right: A newly stable kernel is not stable.  He might even be right
about regressions since 2.6.24.

It's a sorry day when somebody making a simple, reasonable and accurate
feedback is criticised for not providing bug reports.  But don't let him
(or me) stop you guys from toasting your fine success.  You believe it's
stable; what more could anyone want?

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs