On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Ted Ts'o <ty...@mit.edu> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 02:53:30AM +0100, Matt wrote: >> >> Try a kernel before 5a87b7a5da250c9be6d757758425dfeaf8ed3179 >> >> from the tests I've done that one showed the least or no corruption if >> you count the empty /etc/env.d/03opengl as an artefact > > Yes, that's a good test. Also try commit bd2d0210cf. The patch > series that is most likely to be at fault if there is a regression in > between 5a87b7a5d and bd2d0210cf inclusive. > > I did a lot of testing before submitting it, but that wa a tricky > rewrite. If you can reproduce the problem reliably, it might be good > to try commit 16828088f9 (the commit before 5a87b7a5d) and commit > bd2d0210cf. If it reliably reproduces on bd2d0210cf, but is clean on > 16828088f9, then it's my ext4 block i/o submission patches, and we'll > need to either figure out what's going on or back out that set of > changes. > > If that's the case, a bisect of those changes (it's only 6 commits, so > it shouldn't take long) would be most appreciated.
I observed the behavior on bd2d0210cf in a qemu-kvm install of openSUSE 11.3 (x86_64) on *totally* different host - an AMD quad-core. I did /not/ observe the behavior on 16828088f9 (yet). I'll run the test a few more times on 1682.. Additionally, I am building a bisected kernel now ( cb20d5188366f04d96d2e07b1240cc92170ade40 ), but won't be able to get back at it for a while. I hope this helps. -- Jon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
