On Fri, 2016-12-02 at 15:10 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 12/02/2016 02:29 PM, Ewan D. Milne wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-12-02 at 04:21 -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >> On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 08:40:31AM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> >>> Specifically, the problem appears to be caused by the removal of
> >>> the setting of bio->bi_bdev, which would previously be set to NULL.
> >>> If I add:
> >>
> >> Very odd.  For one I would expect it to be NULL anyway, second
> >> I don't see why the behavior changed.  But given that this reverts
> >> to the original assignment and makes things work I'll happily hack it
> >> to get things working again:
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig <h...@lst.de>
> >
> > Yeah, I'm not sure I understand this either, apart from the change
> > adjusting the code to effectively do what it used to and making the
> > test case work.  I'm reluctant to cc: stable yet, let me look at this
> > a bit more and I'll post the actual patch soon.
> >
> Plus we found that this is basically a timing issue; we've found that 
> supposedly fixed bugs will crop up after ~4k iterations.
> (Johannes did a _lot_ of testing here :-)
> So just because the bug failed to materialize can also mean that you 
> simply didn't test long enough.
> 
Yes, and following the code paths it isn't completely clear how this
leads to the single zero-byte corruption, I am continuing to investigate.
There may very well be more than one problem.

On kernel versions I tested where I got a failure it was a solid
failure, it never worked no matter how many times I tried, but I
did not exhaustively test apparently successful kernel versions.
Not thousands, of times, anyway.

-Ewan


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to