On Mon, 9 Sep 2013, Milosz Tanski wrote:
> David,
>
> I guess that's really a better question for Sage. He sent my branch
> (which includes your changes) plus a whole slew of things over to
> Linus. I'm going guess that a small follow on patch is simplest but
> I'll let him comment.
>
> Here's th
David,
I guess that's really a better question for Sage. He sent my branch
(which includes your changes) plus a whole slew of things over to
Linus. I'm going guess that a small follow on patch is simplest but
I'll let him comment.
Here's the original pull request:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel
Milosz Tanski wrote:
> I think that change does the trick. I had it running on the same
> machine for 5 hours and had the kernel forcefully drop some of the
> inodes in the cache (via drop caches) without a crash. I'll send a
> proper patch email after you take a look and make sure I did the righ
Milosz Tanski wrote:
> - (1 << FSCACHE_OP_WAITING);
> + (1 << FSCACHE_OP_WAITING) |
> + (1 << FSCACHE_OP_UNUSE_COOKIE);
Yeah... That'll do it. We could just decrement n_active directly after
calling into the backend - after all, we cannot reduce n_acti
David,
I think that change does the trick. I had it running on the same
machine for 5 hours and had the kernel forcefully drop some of the
inodes in the cache (via drop caches) without a crash. I'll send a
proper patch email after you take a look and make sure I did the right
thing.
Thanks,
- Mil
David,
I ran into another issue that caused one my machines to hang on a
bunch of tasks and then hard lock. Here's the backtrace of the hang:
INFO: task kworker/1:2:4214 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
"echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
kworker/1:2 D
On Fri, 6 Sep 2013, Milosz Tanski wrote:
> Sage,
>
> I've taken David's latest changes and per his request merged his
> 'fscache-fixes-for-ceph' tag then applied my changes on top of that.
> In addition to the pervious changes I also added a fix for the
> warnings the linux-next build bot found.
>
Sage,
I've taken David's latest changes and per his request merged his
'fscache-fixes-for-ceph' tag then applied my changes on top of that.
In addition to the pervious changes I also added a fix for the
warnings the linux-next build bot found.
I've given the results a quick test to make sure it b
Milosz Tanski wrote:
> After running this for a day on some loaded machines I ran into what
> looks like an old issue with the new code. I remember you saw an issue
> that manifested it self in a similar way a while back.
>
> [13837253.462779] FS-Cache: Assertion failed
> [13837253.462782] 3 ==
David,
After running this for a day on some loaded machines I ran into what
looks like an old issue with the new code. I remember you saw an issue
that manifested it self in a similar way a while back.
[13837253.462779] FS-Cache: Assertion failed
[13837253.462782] 3 == 5 is false
[13837253.462807
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, Milosz Tanski wrote:
> Hey gang I think this should be final revision of these changes. The changes
> are:
>
> * David rewrote the cookie validity check (that originally was written by
>Hongyi Jia). You might have seen some emails flying about doing it the
>right way.
Hey gang I think this should be final revision of these changes. The changes
are:
* David rewrote the cookie validity check (that originally was written by
Hongyi Jia). You might have seen some emails flying about doing it the
right way.
* I added crash fix when for Ceph filesystems mount
12 matches
Mail list logo
