From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 02:47:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 02:47:19 -0500 Received: from mx.interplus.ro ([193.231.252.3]:61190 "EHLO mx.interplus.ro") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 02:47:04 -0500 Message-ID: <3A98B8D7.3F456784@interplus.ro> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 09:48:39 +0200 From: Mircea Ciocan Organization: Home Office X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2-ac3 i686) X-Accept-Language: ro, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jens Axboe CC: lk Subject: Re: 242-ac3 loop bug In-Reply-To: <20010224173234.14673.qmail@web1301.mail.yahoo.com> <20010225001427.B420@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Halleluiah ;)!!! Finally, it works as is suposed to do :)))), the load on my dual PIIIx950 is 0.01 three times and I can mount and umonunt ISOs as much I wish. Thank you very much Jens and all that provided usefull feedback, this patch alone deserves including in an .acX release. And Jens if you ever come to Romania give me a call I owe you a lot of beers and pizzas :). Mircea "happy, happy, joy, joy...;)" C. Jens Axboe wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 24 2001, Mark Swanson wrote: > > First, good job on the loop device. It's rock stable for me - except > > thanks, glad to hear it. > > > when I try to load the blowfish module which oops the kernel and > > crashes the loop device:-) No problem, I just use another cipher. > > cipher bug or? never the less, could you ksymoops that and send > it along? > > > The bug I'm reporting is that when a loop device is in use the load of > > the machine stays at 1.00 even though nothing is happening. If I umount > > the loop filesystem the load goes down to 0.00. > > > > > ps -aux | grep loop > > 1674 tty1 DW< 0:00 [loop0] > > > > The system is doing nothing to the loop filesystem. > > Strange that the process isn't logging any cpu usage time. It's > > definately responsible for the 1.00 load. > > Oops, this slipped by me. Patch should fix it. > > -- > Jens Axboe > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > --- drivers/block/loop.c~ Sat Feb 24 23:08:38 2001 > +++ drivers/block/loop.c Sat Feb 24 23:11:13 2001 > @@ -507,7 +507,7 @@ > sprintf(current->comm, "loop%d", lo->lo_number); > > spin_lock_irq(¤t->sigmask_lock); > - siginitsetinv(¤t->blocked, sigmask(SIGKILL)); > + sigfillset(¤t->blocked); > flush_signals(current); > spin_unlock_irq(¤t->sigmask_lock); > > @@ -525,7 +525,7 @@ > up(&lo->lo_sem); > > for (;;) { > - down(&lo->lo_bh_mutex); > + down_interruptible(&lo->lo_bh_mutex); > if (!atomic_read(&lo->lo_pending)) > break; >