From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264257AbTL3Cnh (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Dec 2003 21:43:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264308AbTL3Cnh (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Dec 2003 21:43:37 -0500 Received: from mtaw6.prodigy.net ([64.164.98.56]:57817 "EHLO mtaw6.prodigy.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264257AbTL3Cng (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Dec 2003 21:43:36 -0500 Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 18:43:31 -0800 From: Mike Fedyk To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.4] Is a negative rsect in /proc/partitions normal? Message-ID: <20031230024331.GN1882@matchmail.com> Mail-Followup-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20031230014429.GL1882@matchmail.com> <20031229191106.I6209@schatzie.adilger.int> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031229191106.I6209@schatzie.adilger.int> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 07:11:06PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On Dec 29, 2003 17:44 -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote: > > I'm running 2.4.23-rc5, and I've been running bonnie, burnMMX and burnK7 for > > the last few days on my 3 drive md raid5 array, and I noticed that my > > rsects[1] have gone negative. I might consider this normal but /proc/stat > > (which only shows hda) doesn't show any negative numbers for the same > > stats[2] > > > > Is this a bug? > > > > [1] > > major minor #blocks name rio rmerge rsect ruse wio wmerge wsect wuse running use aveq > > > > 56 0 160086528 hdi 240438349 1318355451 -414508366 16504630 101146331 1132637971 1281537580 24939164 -3 18108868 28693926 > > 56 3 159694132 hdi3 240438290 1318355420 -414508552 16503120 101146229 1132637930 1281537288 24937454 0 19884967 309062 > > 33 0 160086528 hde 240516418 1321486397 -388859454 40325686 90645794 1146603482 1312002136 18444936 -3 14785505 12315041 > > 33 2 159790522 hde2 240516417 1321486394 -388859462 40325686 90645794 1146603482 1312002136 18444936 0 24147141 26883069 > > 3 0 160086528 hda 240675036 1318323453 -412885008 27008859 110939441 1126008079 1306648420 28401642 -3 24294848 41908774 > > 3 3 159694132 hda3 240467546 1317699583 -419535288 24234589 110932078 1125988609 1306423136 28337002 0 4327510 10687939 > > Probably just somewhere printing out %ld instead of %lu or similar. I'm > sure a trivial patch to fix it would be accepted. struct hd_struct in include/linux/genhd.h:61 has them all unsigned int. How's this patch look against 2.4.23? --- drivers/block/genhd.c.orig 2003-12-29 18:35:35.000000000 -0800 +++ drivers/block/genhd.c 2003-12-29 18:40:11.000000000 -0800 @@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ disk_round_stats(hd); seq_printf(s, "%4d %4d %10d %s " - "%d %d %d %d %d %d %d %d %d %d %d\n", + "%u %u %u %u %u %u %u %u %u %u %u\n", gp->major, n, gp->sizes[n], disk_name(gp, n, buf), hd->rd_ios, hd->rd_merges,