From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Sage Weil <sage@newdream.net>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de, bfields@citi.umich.edu
Subject: Re: weird umem vs nfsd regression
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:17:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100617211759.84eccaa3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100618125420.46fda9d6@notabene.brown>
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:54:20 +1000 Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de> wrote:
> > There may also be bugs in the umem driver. Even if the IO errors are
> > bogus, the kernel shouldn't hang up waiting for IO completion as it's
> > doing here.
> >
>
> No? Even if it is due to faulty hardware?
> Do you think the driver should set a timer and disable the card if it hasn't
> heard back for a while?
> I guess that might be reasonable, though if it turns out to be faulty
> hardware I wouldn't trust it on the buss at all...
hm, yes, if a DMA controller goes haywire then adding a timeout
specifically to catch and recover from that one particular hardware
failure mode doesn't seem justified.
If we were going to do that then it should be done centrally at the
block layer with a timer-per-request, tunable on a max(all-end-devices)
basis. blah.
As long as the softlockup detector or NMI watchdog or whatever gives a
useful trace pointing at the problem (as it does) then that's
sufficient.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-18 4:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-17 20:21 weird umem vs nfsd regression Sage Weil
2010-06-17 20:47 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-18 2:54 ` Neil Brown
2010-06-18 4:16 ` Sage Weil
2010-06-18 4:44 ` Sage Weil
2010-06-18 4:17 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100617211759.84eccaa3.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=bfields@citi.umich.edu \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=sage@newdream.net \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox