Posix file lock semanteme expects that waiting processes that request
a conflicting lock on file can be interrputed by signals like SIGALRM.
But, dlm_posix_lock puts waiting process into "Disk Sleep" status.
This failed ocfs2 test suits for posix file lock.
Replacing wait_event_killable with
Posix file lock semanteme expects that waiting processes that request
a conflicting lock on file can be interrputed by signals like SIGALRM.
But, dlm_posix_lock puts waiting process into "Disk Sleep" status.
This failed ocfs2 test suits for posix file lock.
Replacing wait_event_killable with
On 2015/10/14 15:49, Zhangguanghui wrote:
> OCFS2 is often used in high-availaibility systems, This patch enhances
> robustness for the filesystem.
> but storage network is unstable，it still triggers a panic， such as
> ocfs2_start_trans -> __ocfs2_abort ->panic.
> The 's_mount_opt' should depend
OCFS2 is often used in high-availaibility systems, This patch enhances
robustness for the filesystem.
but storage network is unstable，it still triggers a panic， such as
ocfs2_start_trans -> __ocfs2_abort ->panic.
The 's_mount_opt' should depend on the mount option set, If errors=continue is
Hi,
"status = -30" means it has encountered EROFS when start transaction.
And system panic is because s_mount_opt is set to OCFS2_MOUNT_ERRORS_PANIC in
__ocfs2_abort,
ideal with OCFS2_MOUNT_ERRORS_PANIC first in ocfs2_handle_error.
so I think that it is not reasonable, Therefore, this setting
On 2015/10/14 16:45, Zhangguanghui wrote:
> Hi,
> "status = -30" means it has encountered EROFS when start transaction.
> And system panic is because s_mount_opt is set to OCFS2_MOUNT_ERRORS_PANIC in
> __ocfs2_abort,
> ideal with OCFS2_MOUNT_ERRORS_PANIC first in ocfs2_handle_error.
> so I
On 10/14/2015 03:57 AM, Joseph Qi wrote:
> On 2015/10/14 16:45, Zhangguanghui wrote:
>> Hi,
>> "status = -30" means it has encountered EROFS when start transaction.
>> And system panic is because s_mount_opt is set to OCFS2_MOUNT_ERRORS_PANIC
>> in __ocfs2_abort,
>> ideal with
Thanks for reply, just like what Goldwyn said, there is a critical result for
such a simple process.
It has encountered EROFS all the time while calling ocfs2_start_trans, even if
the storage is back to normal.
I 'm trying to make some other changes and don't know if the error is still
being
