From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 05:25:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 05:25:10 -0500 Received: from Unable.to.handle.kernel.NULL.pointer.dereference.de ([212.6.215.146]:50182 "EHLO inode.real-linux.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 05:24:59 -0500 Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 10:52:33 +0100 From: Florian Heinz To: Neil Brown Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Some problems with the raid-stuff in 2.4.0-test12pre3 Message-ID: <20001201105233.D672@inode.real-linux.de> In-Reply-To: <20001130123322.A672@inode.real-linux.de> <14887.2273.174231.960990@notabene.cse.unsw.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <14887.2273.174231.960990@notabene.cse.unsw.edu.au>; from neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au on Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 01:11:45PM +1100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 01:11:45PM +1100, Neil Brown wrote: > On Thursday November 30, sky@dereference.de wrote: > > Hello people, > > > > I have some trouble with the raid-stuff. > > My machine is a Pentium-III, 256 MB ram and 7 scsi-disks (IBM DNES-318350W > > 17B). I'm using raid5 for 6 of these disks (chunk-size 8). > > Machine boots, I do mkraid /dev/md0 and then mke2fs /dev/md0 and that's > > where the problems start. mkfs tries to write 684 inode-tables and after the > > first 30 it gets very slow. ps ax (with wchan) tells me it hangs in > > wakeup_bdflush. > > I'm rather sure it's related to the raidcode, because without raid the disks > > work as expected. > > I'm using an Adaptec 7892A with the aic7xxx-driver, I have disabled the TCQ > > and the extra checks for the new queueing code, but I have tried with both > > activated, too. > > No related messages from the kernel in the syslog. > > It worked fine with 2.2.x. > > Is it just "very slow", but it eventually finishes, it is it so slow, > that it actually stops and doesn't make any progress at all? > > raid5 in 2.4 is definately slower than in 2.2. Could that be all that > you are seeing? It's so slow that it's unusable. Especially writing. open() and close()-calls often hang for 20 seconds or more. write-calls hang for 3-4 seconds. This has to be a bug. But yes, after a long time, it finishes ;) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/