Hi, Kitayama-san
On wed, 23 Mar 2011 13:19:18 +0900, Itaru Kitayama wrote:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 12:00:38 +0800
Miao Xie mi...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
I is testing the new version, in which I fixed the slab shrinker problem
reported by
Chris. In the new version, the delayed node is removed
On wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:57:56 +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 08:08:17 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
I also think that code is racing with the code that frees delayed nodes,
but haven't yet triggered my debugging printks to prove either one.
We free delayed nodes when we want to destroy
On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 17:47:01 +0800
Miao Xie mi...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
we found GFP_KERNEL was passed into kzalloc(), I think this flag trigger the
above lockdep
warning. the attached patch, which against the delayed items operation patch,
may fix this
problem, Could you test it for me?
Hi Miao,
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 18:03:24 +0800
Miao Xie mi...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
The V5 patch is attached, could you test it for me? I have run Chris stress
test, dbench benchmark
on my machine, it work well. I want to check if the above bug still exists or
not.
Thanks
Miao
Here's the
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 08:08:17 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
I also think that code is racing with the code that frees delayed nodes,
but haven't yet triggered my debugging printks to prove either one.
We free delayed nodes when we want to destroy the inode, at that time, just
one task,
which is
Hi Miao,
The possible circular locking dependency message doesn't show up in the updated
V5. However,
I see a new possible irq lock inversion dependency message while running
xfstests.
=
[ INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency
On wed, 23 Mar 2011 12:24:09 +0900, Itaru Kitayama wrote:
Hi Miao,
The possible circular locking dependency message doesn't show up in the
updated V5. However,
I see a new possible irq lock inversion dependency message while running
xfstests.
I is testing the new version, in which I
On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 12:00:38 +0800
Miao Xie mi...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
I is testing the new version, in which I fixed the slab shrinker problem
reported by
Chris. In the new version, the delayed node is removed before the relative
inode is
moved into the unused_inode list(the slab
Excerpts from Miao Xie's message of 2011-03-21 01:05:22 -0400:
On sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:33:34 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
Excerpts from Miao Xie's message of 2011-03-18 05:24:46 -0400:
Changelog V3 - V4:
- Fix nested lock, which is reported by Itaru Kitayama, by updating space
cache
Hi Miao,
Here is an excerpt of the V4 patch applied kernel boot log:
===
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.36-xie+ #117
---
vgs/1210 is trying to acquire lock:
On tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:33:10 +0900, Itaru Kitayama wrote:
Here is an excerpt of the V4 patch applied kernel boot log:
===
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.36-xie+ #117
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:12:37 +0800
Miao Xie mi...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
We can't fix it by this way, because the work threads may do insertion or
deletion at the same time,
and we may lose some directory items.
Ok.
Maybe we can fix it by adding a reference for the delayed directory items,
Excerpts from Miao Xie's message of 2011-03-18 05:24:46 -0400:
Changelog V3 - V4:
- Fix nested lock, which is reported by Itaru Kitayama, by updating space
cache
inodes in time.
I ran some tests on this and had trouble with my stress.sh script:
http://oss.oracle.com/~mason/stress.sh
I
On sun, 20 Mar 2011 20:33:34 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
Excerpts from Miao Xie's message of 2011-03-18 05:24:46 -0400:
Changelog V3 - V4:
- Fix nested lock, which is reported by Itaru Kitayama, by updating space
cache
inodes in time.
I ran some tests on this and had trouble with my
14 matches
Mail list logo
