Re: [regression] external HDD in USB3 enclosure cannot be dynamically removed (Re: Linux 3.7.5)

On 12.02.2013 01:54, Jonathan Nieder wrote: Sarah Sharp wrote: Can you turn on CONFIG_USB_DEBUG and CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD_DEBUGGING, recompile the 3.7.5 kernel, and send me dmesg starting from the point you unmount the device and then power it off? I'd like to keep that patch in stable, but

Re: [regression] external HDD in USB3 enclosure cannot be dynamically removed (Re: Linux 3.7.5)

On 12.02.2013 21:42, Sarah Sharp wrote: [..] I think I see the issue. Your host controller reports the Inactive state after a USB disconnect. My host controllers go to the RxDetect state on a disconnect. The patches that went into 3.8 and the stable kernels to better handle the Inactive

Re: 3.12.8 poor network performance x86_64

On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 20:30:55 +0100, Daniel Exner wrote: I recently upgraded the Kernel from version 3.10 to latest stable 3.12.8, did the usual make oldconfig (resulting config attached). But now I noticed some _really_ low network performance. Try: sysctl

3.12.6 warning/lockup at kernel/workqueue.c:1587 worker_enter_idle+0xde/0x150()

For one of my machines the new year started with a hiccup: Jan 1 01:55:39 tux kernel: [ cut here ] Jan 1 01:55:39 tux kernel: WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 21725 at kernel/workqueue.c:1587 worker_enter_idle+0xde/0x150() Jan 1 01:55:39 tux kernel: Modules linked in:

Re: [PATCH 3.12 00/83] 3.12.4-stable review

On Fri, 06 Dec 2013 13:50:50 -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.12.4 release. Patch applied cleanly on top of 3.12.3. Built runs with no problems on both a Thinkpad T60 (x86) and two generic whiteboxes (x64, i5/i7). No regressions noticed so

Re: [PATCH 3.14 000/110] 3.14.10-stable review

On Sat, 28 Jun 2014 10:45:57 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.14.10 release. Built running fine on 3 different machines (x86_64), mix of old and new HW, all with Gentoo ~amd64 userland. So far no regressions: graphics, sound, btrfs,

Re: [PATCH 3.14 59/59] ALSA: hda - Adjust speaker HPF and add LED support for HP Spectre 13

On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 15:19:48 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: From: Takashi Iwai ti...@suse.de commit 8b3dfdaf0c25a584cb31d04d2574115cf2d422ab upstream. Building on Gentoo ~amd64 with gcc 4.9.0: LD [M] sound/pci/snd-intel8x0.o CC [M] sound/pci/hda/patch_sigmatel.o

Re: [PATCH 3.14 00/59] 3.14.11-stable review

On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 15:18:49 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: Takashi Iwai ti...@suse.de ALSA: hda - Adjust speaker HPF and add LED support for HP Spectre 13 Building on Gentoo ~amd64 with gcc 4.9.0 this patch (#59) fails: LD [M] sound/pci/snd-intel8x0.o CC [M]

Re: [PATCH 3.17 00/25] 3.17.1-stable review

On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 11:44:14 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 09:22:35AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: Doesn't build in 3.17 properly :( Older kernels can use rcu_note_context_switch() instead of rcu_note_voluntary_context_switch(), which didn't show up until

Re: [PATCH 3.14 00/88] 3.14.18-stable review

On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 16:44:29 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 03:04:34PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.14.18 release. There are 88 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone

Re: [PATCH 3.14 000/114] 3.14.19-stable review

On Mon, 15 Sep 2014 12:25:00 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.14.19 release. As usual: patched, built running fine on 3 different machines (x86_64), clients server with mix of old and new HW, all with Gentoo ~amd64 userland; no

Re: [PATCH 3.14 000/203] 3.14.24-stable review

On Wed, 12 Nov 2014 10:14:30 +0900, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.14.24 release. Us usual: patched, built, running fine on three different machines with Gentoo ~amd64 userland as server, desktop, laptop. No funnies so far. thanks! -h -- To

Re: 3.18.1: broken directory with one file too many

On 12/17/14 22:22, J. Bruce Fields wrote: On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:19:18PM +, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: (..oddly broken directory over NFS..) That doesn't sound familiar. A network trace showing the READDIR would be really useful. Since this is so reproducible, I think that should

Re: 3.18.1: broken directory with one file too many

On 12/18/14 17:32, J. Bruce Fields wrote: So this is two separate tests, both failed, the only difference is that the tcpdump was run on the client in one case and the server in the other? Exactly: client first, then I realized you'd want to look at the server-side too. That being said..

Re: 3.18.1: broken directory with one file too many

On 12/18/14 18:06, J. Bruce Fields wrote: Whoops, now I see, the server-side trace has the same problem, I just overlooked it the first time. Excellent, so we know it's the server's fault. Really would have been odd to not have it in the server trace. ..in order to rule out a mistake on my

Re: 3.18.1: broken directory with one file too many

On 12/20/14 19:02, J. Bruce Fields wrote: Gah. Does this fix it? It does! Well done. :) Reported-by: Holger Hoffstätte holger.hoffstae...@googlemail.com Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte holger.hoffstae...@googlemail.com Thanks! Holger -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe

3.18.1: broken directory with one file too many

g (please CC: for followups) I just spent two hours trying to untangle a *weird* bug that I have not seen before. It might be new to 3.18.x but I don't know for sure. Apologies in advance for the long prelude but I figured I need to describe the problem scenario as precisely as possible. All

Re: [PATCH 3.12 00/96] 3.12.30-stable review

On Fri, 10 Oct 2014 09:32:45 +0200, William Dauchy wrote: Hi stable release team, On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Jiri Slaby jsl...@suse.cz wrote: This one is special. First, it is rounded (30). Second, most of the patches are performance improvements. They are coming from SUSE Enterprise

Re: 1e918876 breaks r8169 (linux-3.18+)

On Fri, 06 Feb 2015 15:04:50 +0100, Tomas Szepe wrote: Unfortunately, I have to take this back. I made the conclusion too early. The problem appears with this patch applied, too, only perhaps later and with a different frequency pattern. +1 can confirm - I also see the stack trace in

Re: Dirty pages underflow on 3.14.23

On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 12:54:43 -0500, Mikulas Patocka wrote: On Tue, 6 Jan 2015, Johannes Weiner wrote: The bug probably happened during git pull or apt-get update, though one can't be sure that these commands caused it. I see that 3.14.24 containes some fix for underflow (commit

Re: 1e918876 breaks r8169 (linux-3.18+)

On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 11:31:04 +0100, Florian Westphal wrote: Tomas Szepe sz...@pinerecords.com wrote: I tried to reproduce this without success so far on my RTL8168d/8111d device. I've been running 40 parallel netperf TCP_STREAM tests (1gbit) for the last 5 hours and so far I saw no

Re: [GIT PULL] ext4 changes for 4.2-rc1

On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 23:46:26 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: ext4: set lazytime on remount if MS_LAZYTIME is set by mount I was wondering what had happened to this bug and was about to ask, just as I saw this. It applies cleanly to 4.1 and does the trick - just tested with util-linux-2.16.2. My /

[PATCH] loop: properly observe rotational flag of underlying device

- as is the case on e.g. tmpfs - we assume nonrotational storage. If there is a better way to identify such non-devices I'd love to hear them. Signed-off-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger.hoffstae...@googlemail.com> --- drivers/block/loop.c | 19 +++ 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) diff

Re: [PATCH] loop: properly observe rotational flag of underlying device

On 11/11/15 22:29, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 11/11/2015 08:21 AM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: >> >> The loop driver always declares the rotational flag of its device as >> rotational, even when the device of the mapped file is nonrotational, >> as is the case with SSDs or

Re: Soft lockup issue in Linux 4.1.9

On 10/08/15 18:56, Christoph Biedl wrote: > Eric Dumazet wrote... > > [ commit 83fccfc3940c4a2db90fd7e7079f5b465cd8c6af ] > >> It definitely should help ! > > Yesterday, I've experienced issues somewhat similar to this, but I'm > not entirely sure: > > Four of five systems running 4.1.9

Re: Kernel 4.1.6 Panic due to slab corruption

On Mon, 07 Sep 2015 14:30:49 +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > If you have the vmlinux image for the kernel you were running at the > time, the crash occured, could you post the output of addr2line -f -e > path/to/vmlinux 8115bd4d to see if it also fails in > get_freepointer. Had to

Re: Kernel 4.1.6 Panic due to slab corruption

On Mon, 07 Sep 2015 11:41:17 +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > Hello, > > On one of our servers I've observed the a kernel pannic > happening with the following backtrace: > > [654405.527070] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at > 00028001 > [654405.527076] IP: []

Re: Kernel 4.1.6 Panic due to slab corruption

On Mon, 07 Sep 2015 11:49:12 +, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: > On Mon, 07 Sep 2015 14:30:49 +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > >> If you have the vmlinux image for the kernel you were running at the >> time, the crash occured, could you post the output of addr2line -f -e

Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs: avoid passing int param to start_transaction which takes u64

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 14:29:41 +, Alexandru Moise wrote: > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Moise <00moses.alexande...@gmail.com> > --- > fs/btrfs/transaction.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/transaction.c b/fs/btrfs/transaction.c > index

Re: Soft lockup issue in Linux 4.1.9

On Wed, 30 Sep 2015 23:59:43 +0200, Olivier Bonvalet wrote: > for information, I've just upgraded 6 servers from Linux 4.1.8 to Linux > 4.1.9, and have some random soft lockup. If this can help : Congratulations! You're not the first one to get hit by this, but you are probably the first one to

Re: kernel 4.1.9: networking hangs with rcu_preempt self-detected stall, 4.1.8 works; was: Re: [PATCH 4.1 125/159] net: call rcu_read_lock early in process_backlog

On 10/01/15 13:29, Wolfgang Walter wrote: > Am Dienstag, 29. September 2015, 12:48:43 schrieb Andre Tomt: >> On 29. sep. 2015 12:21, Andre Tomt wrote: >>> Meanwhile I'll revert both the mentioned net patches and see how it goes. >> >> So that blew up as well, meaning it's not any of these two

Re: Soft lockup issue in Linux 4.1.9

On 10/01/15 13:29, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 3:59 AM, Holger Hoffstätte > <holger.hoffstae...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 06:41:46 +0200, Andre Tomt wrote: >> >>> On 01. okt. 2015 00:37, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:

Re: Soft lockup issue in Linux 4.1.9

On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 06:41:46 +0200, Andre Tomt wrote: > On 01. okt. 2015 00:37, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: >> On Wed, 30 Sep 2015 23:59:43 +0200, Olivier Bonvalet wrote: >> >>> for information, I've just upgraded 6 servers from Linux 4.1.8 to Linux >>> 4.1.9,

Re: Soft lockup issue in Linux 4.1.9

On 10/02/15 08:52, Andre Tomt wrote: > On 01. okt. 2015 13:52, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:43 AM, Holger Hoffstätte >> <holger.hoffstae...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>> On 10/01/15 13:29, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> >>>> commit 83fccfc394

Re: EXT4: new warnings from 4.3.0-rc2

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 16:08:59 +0100, Chris Clayton wrote: > Applying the 4.2.1-rc1 patch results in a kernel that emits the messages, > so I guess my fix-not-yet-in-4.2 theory is right. I have been getting these forever since I switched to ext4-for-ext3, at least since early last year - if not

Re: WARNING in shmem_evict_inode

On 12/02/15 10:29, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Mon, 23 Nov 2015, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: [snip] >>> triggers WARNING in shmem_evict_inode: >>> >>> [ cut here ] >>> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 10442 at

Re: PAX: size overflow detected in function try_merge_map fs/btrfs/extent_map.c:238

On 11/27/15 12:20, Toralf Förster wrote: > On 11/27/2015 12:07 PM, Filipe Manana wrote: >> Try the following (also pasted at >> https://friendpaste.com/5O6o1cqWqJZDIKrH1YqG7y): > > Doesn't apply neither against the used 4.2.6 kernel nor aginst current git > HEAD : > > t44 linux # patch -p1

Re: [PATCH 4.4 63/99] [media] usbvision fix overflow of interfaces array

On Sun, 05 Jun 2016 14:41:36 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > 4.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > -- > > From: Oliver Neukum > > commit 588afcc1c0e45358159090d95bf7b246fb67565f upstream. > > This fixes the crash

Re: shrink_active_list/try_to_release_page bug? (was Re: xfs trace in 4.4.2 / also in 4.3.3 WARNING fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c:1232 xfs_vm_releasepage)

On 06/02/16 14:13, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > > Am 31.05.2016 um 09:31 schrieb Dave Chinner: >> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 08:11:42AM +0200, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: I'm half tempted at this point to mostly ignore this mm/ behavour because we are moving down the path

Re: UBSAN: Undefined behaviour in fs/btrfs/inode.c:5845:10

On 01/26/16 11:13, Chris Bainbridge wrote: > Booting 4.5.0-rc1 with new UBSAN checker enabled: > > [3.859690] > > [3.859694] UBSAN: Undefined behaviour in fs/btrfs/inode.c:5845:10 > [3.859696] signed

Re: Isn't 4.4 long term stable?

On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 22:09:38 +0530, Ani Sinha wrote: > kernel.org lists linux 4.4.1 as "stable" but the releases page lists > it as a long term stable kernel. Which one is true? Both :) 4.4.1 is the *current* stable release and will be labeled LTS when 4.5.1 is released. It has been this way for

Re: [PATCHSET v3][RFC] Make background writeback not suck

On 04/01/16 03:01, Dave Chinner wrote: > Can you go back to your original kernel, and lower nr_requests to 8? Sure, did that and as expected it didn't help much. Under prolonged stress it was actually even a bit worse than writeback throttling. IMHO that's not really surprising either, since

Re: [PATCHSET v3][RFC] Make background writeback not suck

Hi, Jens mentioned on Twitter I should post my experience here as well, so here we go. I've backported this series (incl. updates) to stable-4.4.x - not too difficult, minus the NVM part which I don't need anyway - and have been running it for the past few days without any problem whatsoever,

Re: [PATCH] loop: properly observe rotational flag of underlying device

[cc: linux-block] On 05/12/16 22:28, gwendal grignou wrote: > Holger Hoffstätte googlemail.com> writes: > >> >> On 11/11/15 23:08, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: >>> On 11/11/15 22:29, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> On 11/11/2015 08:21 AM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: &

Re: [PATCH] block: loop: fix filesystem corruption in case of aio/dio

Forwarded Message Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: loop: fix filesystem corruption in case of aio/dio Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 21:16:42 +0800 From: Ming Lei <ming@canonical.com> To: Holger Hoffstätte <holger.hoffstae...@googlemail.com> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:5

Re: [PATCH 4.4 000/118] 4.4.22-stable review

On 09/23/16 10:14, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 09:56:28PM +0200, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: >> did you forget to add the -net patches in stable-queue.git/tree/net-4.4 >> or are they on hold for some reason? I think they were supposed to go >> into .22.

Re: [PATCH 4.4 000/118] 4.4.22-stable review

On 09/22/16 19:28, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.22 release. > There are 118 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. Greg, did you

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: limit async_work allocation and worker func duration

as far as I can imagine the possible > behaviour of the various async parameters just from reading the code. If it's any help I have been running with this for a few days now; regular day-to-day work, snapshots, balancing, defrags etc. with no obvious problems, though I haven't tried to break it wit

Re: [PATCH] SCSI: delay run queue if device is blocked in scsi_dev_queue_ready()

On 12/05/17 06:16, Ming Lei wrote: > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 11:48:07PM +0000, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: >> On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 06:45:08 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:09:20PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote: >>>> On Sun, 2017-12-03 at 00:3

Re: r8169 regression: UDP packets dropped intermittantly

On 12/18/17 06:49, Jonathan Woithe wrote: > Resend to netdev. LKML CCed in case anyone in the wider kernel community > can suggest a way forward. Please CC responses if replying only to LKML. > > It seems that this 4+ year old regression in the r8169 driver (documented in > this thread on

Re: [PATCH] SCSI: run queue if SCSI device queue isn't ready and queue is idle

gt; *hctx) > out_put_device: > put_device(>sdev_gendev); > out: > + if (atomic_read(>device_busy) == 0 && !scsi_device_blocked(sdev)) > + blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue(hctx, SCSI_QUEUE_DELAY); > return false; > } So just to follow up

Re: [PATCH] block: kyber: make kyber more friendly with merging

On 05/22/18 16:48, Jianchao Wang wrote: > Currently, kyber is very unfriendly with merging. kyber depends > on ctx rq_list to do merging, however, most of time, it will not > leave any requests in ctx rq_list. This is because even if tokens > of one domain is used up, kyber will try to dispatch

Re: [PATCH] block: kyber: make kyber more friendly with merging

On 05/22/18 19:46, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 5/22/18 10:20 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 5/22/18 10:17 AM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: >>> On 05/22/18 16:48, Jianchao Wang wrote: >>>> Currently, kyber is very unfriendly with merging. kyber depends >>>> on ctx rq

Re: [PATCH IMPROVEMENT] block, bfq: limit sectors served with interactive weight raising

On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 15:00:56 +0100, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: > On 12/28/17 12:19, Paolo Valente wrote: > (snip half a tech report ;) > > So either this or the previous patch ("limit tags for writes and async I/O" > can lead to a hard, unrecoverable hang with heavy write

Re: [PATCH 2/8] blk-mq: protect completion path with RCU

On 01/09/18 00:27, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: > On 01/08/18 23:55, Jens Axboe wrote: >> the good old >> >> int srcu_idx = srcu_idx; >> >> should get the job done. > > (Narrator: It didn't.) Narrator: we retract our previous statement and apologize fo

Re: [PATCH 2/8] blk-mq: protect completion path with RCU

On 01/08/18 20:15, Tejun Heo wrote: > Currently, blk-mq protects only the issue path with RCU. This patch > puts the completion path under the same RCU protection. This will be > used to synchronize issue/completion against timeout by later patches, > which will also add the comments. > >

Re: [PATCH 2/8] blk-mq: protect completion path with RCU

On 01/08/18 23:55, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 1/8/18 1:15 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 1/8/18 12:57 PM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: >>> On 01/08/18 20:15, Tejun Heo wrote: >>>> Currently, blk-mq protects only the issue path with RCU. This patch >>>> puts the com

Re: [PATCH BUGFIX V2 0/2] block, bfq: fix two memory leaks related to cgroups

block/bfq-iosched.c | 3 +++ > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Gave this a try and can't reproduce the leak anymore, so for both patches: Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte <hol...@applied-asynchrony.com> cheers! Holger

Re: [PATCH 4.14 000/118] 4.14.14-stable review

On 01/15/18 13:33, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.14.14 release. > There are 118 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. Applied to 4.14.13

Re: [PATCH IMPROVEMENT] block, bfq: limit sectors served with interactive weight raising

On 01/12/18 06:58, Paolo Valente wrote: > > >> Il giorno 28 dic 2017, alle ore 15:00, Holger Hoffstätte >> <hol...@applied-asynchrony.com> ha scritto: >> >> >> On 12/28/17 12:19, Paolo Valente wrote: >> (snip half a tech report ;) >>

Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 1/1] block, bfq: add requeue-request hook

On 02/06/18 13:26, Paolo Valente wrote: (..) > As Oleksadr asked too, is it deadline or mq-deadline? You can use deadline as alias as long as blk-mq is active. This doesn't work when mq-deadline is built as a module, but that doesn't seem to be the problem here. >> [ 484.179292] BUG: unable to

Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 1/1] block, bfq: add requeue-request hook

On 02/06/18 15:55, Paolo Valente wrote: > > >> Il giorno 06 feb 2018, alle ore 14:40, Holger Hoffstätte >> <hol...@applied-asynchrony.com> ha scritto: >> >> >> The plot thickens! >> > > Yep, the culprit seems clearer, though ... > >&

Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 1/1] block, bfq: add requeue-request hook

The plot thickens! Just as I was about to post that I didn't have any problems - because I didn't have any - I decided to do a second test, activated bfq on my workstation, on a hunch typed "sync" and .. the machine locked up, hard. Rebooted, activated bfq, typed sync..sync hangs. Luckily this

Re: TCP and BBR: reproducibly low cwnd and bandwidth

On 02/16/18 16:15, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote: > Hi, David, Eric, Neal et al. > > On čtvrtek 15. února 2018 21:42:26 CET Oleksandr Natalenko wrote: >> I've faced an issue with a limited TCP bandwidth between my laptop and a >> server in my 1 Gbps LAN while using BBR as a congestion control

Re: TCP and BBR: reproducibly low cwnd and bandwidth

On 02/16/18 17:56, Neal Cardwell wrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:26 AM, Holger Hoffstätte > <hol...@applied-asynchrony.com> wrote: >> >> BBR in general will run with lower cwnd than e.g. Cubic or others. >> That's a feature and necessary for WAN transfers.

Re: [PATCH IMPROVEMENT] block, bfq: limit sectors served with interactive weight raising

On 12/28/17 12:19, Paolo Valente wrote: (snip half a tech report ;) So either this or the previous patch ("limit tags for writes and async I/O" can lead to a hard, unrecoverable hang with heavy writes. Since I couldn't log into the affected system anymore I couldn't get any stack traces, blk-mq

Re: NULL pointer dereferences with 4.14.27

On 03/17/18 19:41, Carlos Carvalho wrote: > I've put 4.14.27 this morning in this machine and in about 2h it started > showing null dereferences identical to the following one. There were several > of > them, with about 1/2h of interval. Strangely it continued to work and I saw no > other

Re: [PATCH 4.18 000/135] 4.18.15-stable review

On 10/16/18 19:03, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.18.15 release. Gave this a try since I have r8169 NICs. Applied over .14 and now running on three different machines. No observed regressions in dmesg or behaviour; all smooth sailing. cheers!

Re: [PATCH 4.19 025/361] ACPICA: AML interpreter: add region addresses in global list during initialization

On 11/11/18 11:16 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: 4.19-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. As probably expected this patch causes problems. In my case one server can no longer load the nct6775 hwmon module, which means the fan cannot be monitored, and

Re: [PATCH 4.19 025/361] ACPICA: AML interpreter: add region addresses in global list during initialization

Hello Erik, thanks for responding. On 11/12/18 8:01 PM, Schmauss, Erik wrote: As probably expected this patch causes problems. In my case one server can no longer load the nct6775 hwmon module, which means the fan cannot be monitored, and therefore my monitoring system promptly starts spamming

Re: [PATCH 4.19 025/361] ACPICA: AML interpreter: add region addresses in global list during initialization

On 11/12/18 8:25 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 07:30:57PM +0100, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: On 11/11/18 11:16 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: 4.19-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. As probably expected this patch causes problems

Re: [PATCH 4.18 000/228] 4.18.12-stable review

On 10/02/18 15:21, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.18.12 release. Applied over .11 and now running on three different machines. No observed regressions in dmesg or behaviour. cheers! Holger

Re: [PATCH 4.18 000/123] 4.18.6-stable review

On 09/03/18 18:55, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.18.6 release. Unfortunately this is busted. First blamed my custom patches, but as it turns out a 100% vanilla 4.18.6 build crashes as well. Single-user starts, but later when starting services

Re: [PATCH 4.18 74/88] drm/atomic: Use drm_drv_uses_atomic_modeset() for debugfs creation

On 09/27/18 11:03, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: 4.18-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. -- From: Lyude Paul commit 3c499ea0c662e2f38aafbd4f516b08aab8cfa0e5 upstream. As pointed out by Daniel Vetter, we should be usinng

Re: [PATCH 4.18 74/88] drm/atomic: Use drm_drv_uses_atomic_modeset() for debugfs creation

On 09/27/18 14:37, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:43:33PM +0200, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: On 09/27/18 11:03, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: 4.18-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. -- From: Lyude Paul commit

Re: [PATCH 4.18 74/88] drm/atomic: Use drm_drv_uses_atomic_modeset() for debugfs creation

On 09/27/18 15:26, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: On 09/27/18 14:37, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:43:33PM +0200, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: On 09/27/18 11:03, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: 4.18-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know

Re: [PATCH 4.18 74/88] drm/atomic: Use drm_drv_uses_atomic_modeset() for debugfs creation

On 09/27/18 16:05, Sean Paul wrote: On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 03:53:26PM +0200, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: On 09/27/18 15:26, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: On 09/27/18 14:37, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:43:33PM +0200, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: On 09/27/18 11:03, Greg Kroah

3.12.6 warning/lockup at kernel/workqueue.c:1587 worker_enter_idle+0xde/0x150()

For one of my machines the new year started with a hiccup: Jan 1 01:55:39 tux kernel: [ cut here ] Jan 1 01:55:39 tux kernel: WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 21725 at kernel/workqueue.c:1587 worker_enter_idle+0xde/0x150() Jan 1 01:55:39 tux kernel: Modules linked in:

Re: 3.12.8 poor network performance x86_64

On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 20:30:55 +0100, Daniel Exner wrote: > I recently upgraded the Kernel from version 3.10 to latest stable > 3.12.8, did the usual "make oldconfig" (resulting config attached). > > But now I noticed some _really_ low network performance. Try: sysctl

Re: [PATCH 3.12 00/83] 3.12.4-stable review

On Fri, 06 Dec 2013 13:50:50 -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.12.4 release. Patch applied cleanly on top of 3.12.3. Built & runs with no problems on both a Thinkpad T60 (x86) and two generic whiteboxes (x64, i5/i7). No regressions noticed

Re: [PATCH 3.14 59/59] ALSA: hda - Adjust speaker HPF and add LED support for HP Spectre 13

On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 15:19:48 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > From: Takashi Iwai > > commit 8b3dfdaf0c25a584cb31d04d2574115cf2d422ab upstream. Building on Gentoo ~amd64 with gcc 4.9.0: LD [M] sound/pci/snd-intel8x0.o CC [M] sound/pci/hda/patch_sigmatel.o

Re: [PATCH 3.14 00/59] 3.14.11-stable review

On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 15:18:49 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > Takashi Iwai > ALSA: hda - Adjust speaker HPF and add LED support for HP Spectre 13 Building on Gentoo ~amd64 with gcc 4.9.0 this patch (#59) fails: LD [M] sound/pci/snd-intel8x0.o CC [M] sound/pci/hda/patch_sigmatel.o

Re: [PATCH 3.14 000/110] 3.14.10-stable review

On Sat, 28 Jun 2014 10:45:57 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.14.10 release. Built & running fine on 3 different machines (x86_64), mix of old and new HW, all with Gentoo ~amd64 userland. So far no regressions: graphics, sound, btrfs,

Re: [PATCH IMPROVEMENT] block, bfq: limit sectors served with interactive weight raising

On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 15:00:56 +0100, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: > On 12/28/17 12:19, Paolo Valente wrote: > (snip half a tech report ;) > > So either this or the previous patch ("limit tags for writes and async I/O" > can lead to a hard, unrecoverable hang with heavy write

Re: [PATCH 2/8] blk-mq: protect completion path with RCU

On 01/08/18 20:15, Tejun Heo wrote: > Currently, blk-mq protects only the issue path with RCU. This patch > puts the completion path under the same RCU protection. This will be > used to synchronize issue/completion against timeout by later patches, > which will also add the comments. > >

Re: [PATCH 2/8] blk-mq: protect completion path with RCU

On 01/08/18 23:55, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 1/8/18 1:15 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 1/8/18 12:57 PM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: >>> On 01/08/18 20:15, Tejun Heo wrote: >>>> Currently, blk-mq protects only the issue path with RCU. This patch >>>> puts the com

Re: [PATCH 2/8] blk-mq: protect completion path with RCU

On 01/09/18 00:27, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: > On 01/08/18 23:55, Jens Axboe wrote: >> the good old >> >> int srcu_idx = srcu_idx; >> >> should get the job done. > > (Narrator: It didn't.) Narrator: we retract our previous statement and apologize fo

Re: [PATCH BUGFIX V2 0/2] block, bfq: fix two memory leaks related to cgroups

block/bfq-iosched.c | 3 +++ > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Gave this a try and can't reproduce the leak anymore, so for both patches: Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte cheers! Holger

Re: [PATCH] SCSI: delay run queue if device is blocked in scsi_dev_queue_ready()

On 12/05/17 06:16, Ming Lei wrote: > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 11:48:07PM +0000, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: >> On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 06:45:08 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:09:20PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote: >>>> On Sun, 2017-12-03 at 00:3

Re: [PATCH IMPROVEMENT] block, bfq: limit sectors served with interactive weight raising

On 12/28/17 12:19, Paolo Valente wrote: (snip half a tech report ;) So either this or the previous patch ("limit tags for writes and async I/O" can lead to a hard, unrecoverable hang with heavy writes. Since I couldn't log into the affected system anymore I couldn't get any stack traces, blk-mq

Re: r8169 regression: UDP packets dropped intermittantly

On 12/18/17 06:49, Jonathan Woithe wrote: > Resend to netdev. LKML CCed in case anyone in the wider kernel community > can suggest a way forward. Please CC responses if replying only to LKML. > > It seems that this 4+ year old regression in the r8169 driver (documented in > this thread on

Re: NULL pointer dereferences with 4.14.27

On 03/17/18 19:41, Carlos Carvalho wrote: > I've put 4.14.27 this morning in this machine and in about 2h it started > showing null dereferences identical to the following one. There were several > of > them, with about 1/2h of interval. Strangely it continued to work and I saw no > other

Re: [PATCH IMPROVEMENT] block, bfq: limit sectors served with interactive weight raising

On 01/12/18 06:58, Paolo Valente wrote: > > >> Il giorno 28 dic 2017, alle ore 15:00, Holger Hoffstätte >> ha scritto: >> >> >> On 12/28/17 12:19, Paolo Valente wrote: >> (snip half a tech report ;) >> >> So either this or the previous pa

Re: [PATCH 4.14 000/118] 4.14.14-stable review

On 01/15/18 13:33, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.14.14 release. > There are 118 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. Applied to 4.14.13

Re: TCP and BBR: reproducibly low cwnd and bandwidth

On 02/16/18 16:15, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote: > Hi, David, Eric, Neal et al. > > On čtvrtek 15. února 2018 21:42:26 CET Oleksandr Natalenko wrote: >> I've faced an issue with a limited TCP bandwidth between my laptop and a >> server in my 1 Gbps LAN while using BBR as a congestion control

Re: TCP and BBR: reproducibly low cwnd and bandwidth

On 02/16/18 17:56, Neal Cardwell wrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:26 AM, Holger Hoffstätte > wrote: >> >> BBR in general will run with lower cwnd than e.g. Cubic or others. >> That's a feature and necessary for WAN transfers. > > Please note that there's no

Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 1/1] block, bfq: add requeue-request hook

On 02/06/18 13:26, Paolo Valente wrote: (..) > As Oleksadr asked too, is it deadline or mq-deadline? You can use deadline as alias as long as blk-mq is active. This doesn't work when mq-deadline is built as a module, but that doesn't seem to be the problem here. >> [ 484.179292] BUG: unable to

Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 1/1] block, bfq: add requeue-request hook

The plot thickens! Just as I was about to post that I didn't have any problems - because I didn't have any - I decided to do a second test, activated bfq on my workstation, on a hunch typed "sync" and .. the machine locked up, hard. Rebooted, activated bfq, typed sync..sync hangs. Luckily this

Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 1/1] block, bfq: add requeue-request hook

On 02/06/18 15:55, Paolo Valente wrote: > > >> Il giorno 06 feb 2018, alle ore 14:40, Holger Hoffstätte >> ha scritto: >> >> >> The plot thickens! >> > > Yep, the culprit seems clearer, though ... > >> Just as I was about to post that

Re: [PATCH] SCSI: run queue if SCSI device queue isn't ready and queue is idle

) > out_put_device: > put_device(>sdev_gendev); > out: > + if (atomic_read(>device_busy) == 0 && !scsi_device_blocked(sdev)) > + blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue(hctx, SCSI_QUEUE_DELAY); > return false; > } So just to follow up on this: with this patch I haven't encountered any new hangs with blk-mq, regardless of medium (SSD/rotating disk) or scheduler. I cannot speak for other hangs that may be reproducible by other means, but for now here's my: Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte cheers, Holger

  1   2   >