Hello, Artem.
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 02:37:36PM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-09-26 at 18:14 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello, Artem.
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the debug dump. Can you please test whether the
> > below patch fixes the issue?
>
> Hi,
>
> I've tested this, 7 out
On Sat, 2015-09-26 at 18:14 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Artem.
>
> Thanks a lot for the debug dump. Can you please test whether the
> below patch fixes the issue?
Hi,
I've tested this, 7 out of 7 reboots successful, so it looks like this
patch fixes the problem.
Artem.
--
To unsubscribe
On Sat, 2015-09-26 at 18:14 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Artem.
>
> Thanks a lot for the debug dump. Can you please test whether the
> below patch fixes the issue?
Hi,
I've tested this, 7 out of 7 reboots successful, so it looks like this
patch fixes the problem.
Artem.
--
To unsubscribe
Hello, Artem.
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 02:37:36PM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-09-26 at 18:14 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello, Artem.
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the debug dump. Can you please test whether the
> > below patch fixes the issue?
>
> Hi,
>
> I've tested this, 7 out
Hello,
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 04:47:36PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 08:40:18AM +, Dexuan Cui wrote:
> > I can confirm the patch fixes my "slow write" issue too.
> >
> > Tested-by: Dexuan Cui
>
> Yeah, this should make it go away w/o using cgroup writeback
>
Hello,
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 04:47:36PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 08:40:18AM +, Dexuan Cui wrote:
> > I can confirm the patch fixes my "slow write" issue too.
> >
> > Tested-by: Dexuan Cui
>
> Yeah, this should make it go away w/o using cgroup
Hello, Artem.
Thanks a lot for the debug dump. Can you please test whether the
below patch fixes the issue?
Index: work/mm/page-writeback.c
===
--- work.orig/mm/page-writeback.c
+++ work/mm/page-writeback.c
@@ -1956,7 +1956,6 @@
On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 11:49 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Artem.
I've applied this patch on top of
ced255c Merge branch 'next' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rzhang/linux
I've added 'ignore_loglevel' to the kernel boot parameters. I have the
serial console configured and I
On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 11:49 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Artem.
I've applied this patch on top of
ced255c Merge branch 'next' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rzhang/linux
I've added 'ignore_loglevel' to the kernel boot parameters. I have the
serial console configured and I
Hello, Artem.
Thanks a lot for the debug dump. Can you please test whether the
below patch fixes the issue?
Index: work/mm/page-writeback.c
===
--- work.orig/mm/page-writeback.c
+++ work/mm/page-writeback.c
@@ -1956,7 +1956,6 @@
Hello, Artem.
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 01:50:22PM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > Does not compile with multiple errors like
> >
> > linux/fs/fs-writeback.c:799:10: error: ‘struct bdi_writeback’ has no
> > member named ‘last_comp_gen’
> >bdi->wb.last_comp_gen = bdi->wb.comp_gen;
>
> I
On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 09:49 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 16:45 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello, Artem.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:09:46AM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 17:07 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > > So, this should make the
On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 16:45 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Artem.
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:09:46AM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 17:07 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > So, this should make the regression go away. It doesn't fix the
> > > underlying bugs but they
Hello, Artem.
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 01:50:22PM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > Does not compile with multiple errors like
> >
> > linux/fs/fs-writeback.c:799:10: error: ‘struct bdi_writeback’ has no
> > member named ‘last_comp_gen’
> >bdi->wb.last_comp_gen = bdi->wb.comp_gen;
>
> I
On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 16:45 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Artem.
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:09:46AM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 17:07 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > So, this should make the regression go away. It doesn't fix the
> > > underlying bugs but they
On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 09:49 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 16:45 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello, Artem.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:09:46AM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 17:07 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > > So, this should make the
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 05:07:29PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> inode_cgwb_enabled() gates cgroup writeback support. If it returns
> true, each inode is attached to the corresponding memory domain which
> gets mapped to io domain. It currently only tests whether the
> filesystem and bdi support
Hello,
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 08:40:18AM +, Dexuan Cui wrote:
> I can confirm the patch fixes my "slow write" issue too.
>
> Tested-by: Dexuan Cui
Yeah, this should make it go away w/o using cgroup writeback
explicitly; however, I think the proper solution for cgroup writeback
is moving
Hello, Artem.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:09:46AM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 17:07 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > So, this should make the regression go away. It doesn't fix the
> > underlying bugs but they shouldn't get triggered by people not
> > experimenting with
On 09/23/2015 03:07 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
inode_cgwb_enabled() gates cgroup writeback support. If it returns
true, each inode is attached to the corresponding memory domain which
gets mapped to io domain. It currently only tests whether the
filesystem and bdi support cgroup writeback; however,
> On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 17:07 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > So, this should make the regression go away. It doesn't fix the
> > underlying bugs but they shouldn't get triggered by people not
> > experimenting with cgroup.
>
> Tejun,
>
> this hits the nail on the head and makes the
On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 17:07 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> So, this should make the regression go away. It doesn't fix the
> underlying bugs but they shouldn't get triggered by people not
> experimenting with cgroup.
Tejun,
this hits the nail on the head and makes the problem go away.
On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 17:07 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> So, this should make the regression go away. It doesn't fix the
> underlying bugs but they shouldn't get triggered by people not
> experimenting with cgroup.
Tejun,
this hits the nail on the head and makes the problem go away.
> On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 17:07 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > So, this should make the regression go away. It doesn't fix the
> > underlying bugs but they shouldn't get triggered by people not
> > experimenting with cgroup.
>
> Tejun,
>
> this hits the nail on the head and makes the
On 09/23/2015 03:07 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
inode_cgwb_enabled() gates cgroup writeback support. If it returns
true, each inode is attached to the corresponding memory domain which
gets mapped to io domain. It currently only tests whether the
filesystem and bdi support cgroup writeback; however,
Hello, Artem.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:09:46AM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 17:07 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > So, this should make the regression go away. It doesn't fix the
> > underlying bugs but they shouldn't get triggered by people not
> > experimenting with
Hello,
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 08:40:18AM +, Dexuan Cui wrote:
> I can confirm the patch fixes my "slow write" issue too.
>
> Tested-by: Dexuan Cui
Yeah, this should make it go away w/o using cgroup writeback
explicitly; however, I think the proper solution for cgroup
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 05:07:29PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> inode_cgwb_enabled() gates cgroup writeback support. If it returns
> true, each inode is attached to the corresponding memory domain which
> gets mapped to io domain. It currently only tests whether the
> filesystem and bdi support
inode_cgwb_enabled() gates cgroup writeback support. If it returns
true, each inode is attached to the corresponding memory domain which
gets mapped to io domain. It currently only tests whether the
filesystem and bdi support cgroup writeback; however, cgroup writeback
support doesn't work on
inode_cgwb_enabled() gates cgroup writeback support. If it returns
true, each inode is attached to the corresponding memory domain which
gets mapped to io domain. It currently only tests whether the
filesystem and bdi support cgroup writeback; however, cgroup writeback
support doesn't work on
30 matches
Mail list logo