Hi! > >>> Well, it's all about how to actually route the changes and in general > >>> whenever avoidable we try to avoid whole-sale code replacement > >>> especially when most of the structural code is similar like in this > >>> case. Gradually evolving cfq to bfq is likely to take more work but > >>> I'm very positive that it'd definitely be a lot easier to merge the > >>> changes that way and people involved, including the developers and > >>> reviewers, would acquire a lot clearer picture of what's going on in > >>> the process. For example, AFAICS, most of the heuristics added by > >> > >> Would it make sense to merge bfq first, _then_ turn cfq into bfq, then > >> remove bfq? > >> > >> That way > >> > >> 1. Users like me would see improvements soon > >> > >> 2. BFQ would get more testing early. > > > > Like this: I applied patch over today's git... > > > > I only see last bits of panic... > > > > Call trace: > > __bfq_bfqq_expire > > bfq_bfqq_expire > > bfq_dispatch_requests > > sci_request_fn > > ... > > EIP: T.1839+0x26 > > Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception in interrupt > > Shutting down cpus with NMI > > > > ... > > > > Will retry. > > > > Any ideas? > >
> We have tried to think about ways to trigger this failure, but in > vain. Unfortunately, so far no user has reported any failure with > this last version of bfq either. Finally, we have gone through a new > static analysis, but also in this case uselessly. Ok, it is pretty much reproducible here: system just will not finish booting. > So, if you are willing to retry, we have put online a version of the code > filled with many BUG_ONs. I hope they can make it easier to track down the > bug. The archive is here: > http://algogroup.unimore.it/people/paolo/disk_sched/debugging-patches/3.15.0-rc8-v7rc5.tgz > Ok, let me try. > Should this attempt be useless as well, I will, if you do not mind, try by > asking you more details about your system and reproducing your configuration > as much as I can. > It is thinkpad x60 notebook, x86-32 machine with 2GB ram. But I think it died on my x86-32 core duo desktop, too. Best regards, Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
