Re: Strange lockup with 2.6.0

[Wakko Warner <wakko@animx.eu.org>]

> > I am constantly accessing NFS with this machine.  Read and write.  It was
> 
> How much data at one go (max)?

I just dumped the backup I made from jaz to the nfs.  I found out that some
things didn't get backed up.  I did multiple backups and one file was larger
than the last (for the same filesystem).

Once I copyied to nfs (which did *NOT* crash it), I ran md5sum on both nfs
copy and jaz copy.  both were exact same.  then I copyied from nfs to nfs.

The size was about 350mb.  (Quite surprised about the jaz drive performance
=)

> > only when I backed it up with tar.  In the event it doesn't lock, tar
> > crashes w/o error/warning (over NFS).
> 
> So, it locks not always?

In the above case, still was booted with init=/bin/sh and did not lockup.  I
did several tar backups.  Sometimes I got a segmentation fault and killed
tar, other times I got my shell killed.

I have not tried enabling TCP yet.  I'm going to try a 2.4 kernel soon.  (I
want to stay with 2.6 since I have a DVD+RW drive)

> > > byte or 1K or 1M? Does it lock immediately as you start the backup or
> >
> > It locks up usually at one point, but not always.
> 
> Since you could backup to Jazz, looks like your filesystem is ok, NFS also
> works in principle...

As stated above, one of the filesystems did not completely backup.

> > > after some time (you could start some process in the background
> > > periodically printing some info on the terminal, like vmstat, cat
> > > /proc/interrupts, free, tcpdump on both ends to a file...) Can you try NFS
> >
> > I can do this I think.  It's fun when running with init being bash.  It will
> > take some time to do since I can't scroll backwards.
> 
> You could also attach a serial console and direct the output there (then
> you also can scroll).

I have not retrieved this yet.

> > > 10/100mbps?
> >
> > 100 FD always.
> 
> Why I am interested in your experiences is that I also have a problem
> transferring large (several M) files over NFS when the server is 2.6 and
> both ends have 100 FD. (You can see my posts this week about 2.6 NFS.) And
> in my case it TCP fixed it. But I never had hard-locks, just cp hanged in
> D, and tcpdump showed timed out reassembly on the receiving side. But I
> was reading from the server.

I have done several gig of transfers to the 2.4 server.  I was burning a
bunch of data from nfs to dvd+r.

In the tests I did above, I ran dmesg several times, Not once did I see an
oops.  I'm not sure, I may have a hardware problem (It's going to be
replaced soon anyway)

-- 
 Lab tests show that use of micro$oft causes cancer in lab animals