Sorry about that, I remembered as soon as I sent it that I hadn't included version. It's x86_64 version 2.2 (did a conary updateall from 2.1 beta. Uname -r gives 2.6.17.14-0.3.smp.x86_64.
I'll try with a UP kernel although it will take some time as I have to rebuild the e1000 module from the UP kernel sources. I'll let you know if I can reproduce on the UP kernel. I don't think it's related to that ticket as they are all writes anyway and they only see the problem on large files. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Rafiu Fakunle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 27 November 2006 11:40 a.m. To: Dave Watkins Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OF-users] iSCSI bug? Hi Dave, Excellent test and bug report. I wonder whether it may be related to this: https://project.openfiler.com/tracker/ticket/435 Can you try to reproduce with a UP kernel pls. Also I need the output of `uname -r` Thx, R. FTR: this is running r58 from IET svn Dave Watkins wrote: > Hi All > > I think I've found a bug in the iscsi target software in my > benchmarking/testing. > > Some background on the hardware first in case it may be related. > > Dual core/dual opteron with 2GB of ram > 3ware 8006 2 port raid card for OS drives > 3ware 9550SX card for data drives > Dual GB Broadcom on-board NIC's teamed into bond0 (management) > Quad port Intel PCI-E GB NIC with all 4 ports teamed into bond1 (main > iscsi data network) > 4 x 250GB WD SATA HDD's in RAID5 > > Of note here is that I have had to replace the e1000 driver with the > latest from Intel to support the quad port card > > I have made some volumes and mounted them on various windows servers and > have been using iobench to tune performance of the system. When using a > read only test pattern I see this > > BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0! > > Call Trace: <IRQ> <ffffffff8029f73c>{softlockup_tick+210} > <ffffffff80289151>{update_process_times+66} > <ffffffff802713fe>{smp_local_timer_interrupt+35} > <ffffffff80271463>{smp_apic_timer_interrupt+65} > <ffffffff8025f54c>{apic_timer_interrupt+132} <EOI> > <ffffffff88141486>{:iscsi_trgt:istd+83} > <ffffffff88141476>{:iscsi_trgt:istd+67} > <ffffffff80403ea6>{tcp_sendpage+0} > <ffffffff8027fef6>{__wake_up_common+67} > <ffffffff8029131c>{keventd_create_kthread+0} > <ffffffff88141433>{:iscsi_trgt:istd+0} > <ffffffff8029131c>{keventd_create_kthread+0} > <ffffffff80231a7d>{kthread+200} > <ffffffff8025f8a2>{child_rip+8} > <ffffffff8029131c>{keventd_create_kthread+0} > <ffffffff802319b5>{kthread+0} <ffffffff8025f89a>{child_rip+0} > BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0! > > Call Trace: <IRQ> <ffffffff8029f73c>{softlockup_tick+210} > <ffffffff80289151>{update_process_times+66} > <ffffffff802713fe>{smp_local_timer_interrupt+35} > <ffffffff80271463>{smp_apic_timer_interrupt+65} > <ffffffff8025f54c>{apic_timer_interrupt+132} <EOI> > <ffffffff802631ec>{_spin_unlock_irqrestore+8} > <ffffffff80246a25>{try_to_wake_up+955} > <ffffffff881411cc>{:iscsi_trgt:nthread_wakeup+47} > <ffffffff8814219a>{:iscsi_trgt:istd+3431} > <ffffffff80403ea6>{tcp_sendpage+0} > <ffffffff8027fef6>{__wake_up_common+67} > <ffffffff8029131c>{keventd_create_kthread+0} > <ffffffff88141433>{:iscsi_trgt:istd+0} > <ffffffff8029131c>{keventd_create_kthread+0} > <ffffffff80231a7d>{kthread+200} > <ffffffff8025f8a2>{child_rip+8} > <ffffffff8029131c>{keventd_create_kthread+0} > <ffffffff802319b5>{kthread+0} <ffffffff8025f89a>{child_rip+0} > > Doing write only based patterns this doesn't come up. After this > performance of the system dives (from about 110MB/sec of iscsi > performance to about 10MB/sec). > > This is fairly reproducible here so if you need anymore information just > ask. > > Dave > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Openfiler-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openfiler.com/mailman/listinfo/openfiler-users > _______________________________________________ Openfiler-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openfiler.com/mailman/listinfo/openfiler-users
