On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 05:34:04PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 05-02-08 21:57:03, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> >
> > I have a FIXME at migrate.c:524 documenting exactly that. The
> > difficult question was by how much we should extent the journal. ? But
> > in reality we might have accumulated en
On Tue 05-02-08 21:57:03, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 02:42:28PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Tue 05-02-08 17:53:42, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > >
> > > How about the patch below. I did the below testing
> > > a) migrate a file
> > > b) run fs_inode fsstres fsx_linux.
> > >
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 02:42:28PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 05-02-08 17:53:42, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> >
> > How about the patch below. I did the below testing
> > a) migrate a file
> > b) run fs_inode fsstres fsx_linux.
> >
> > The intention was to find out whether the new locking is br
y-pressure during this test so that
data blocks aren't cached for the whole time of the test... That should
reasonably stress the migration code.
> ext4: Fix circular locking dependency with migrate and rm.
>
> From: Aneesh Kumar K.V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> We now take in
arning.
ext4: Fix circular locking dependency with migrate and rm.
From: Aneesh Kumar K.V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
We now take inode->i_mutex lock to prevent any update of the inode i_data
field. Before we switch the inode format we take i_data_sem to prevent
parallel read.
On Mon 04-02-08 22:42:08, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 05:31:56PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon 04-02-08 15:42:28, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > > This is with the new ext3 -> ext4 migrate code added. The recently added
> > > lockdep for jbd2 helped to find thi
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 05:31:56PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon 04-02-08 15:42:28, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > This is with the new ext3 -> ext4 migrate code added. The recently added
> > lockdep for jbd2 helped to find this out. We want to hold the i_data_sem
> > on the ext3 inode du
change under you
(but I suggest adding some BUG_ONs to verify that the file really doesn't
change :).
Honza
> ===========
> [ INFO: possible
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 10:23:16AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Monday 04 February 2008 5:12:28 am Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is with the new ext3 -> ext4 migrate code added. The recently added
> > lockdep for jbd2 helped to find this out. We want to hold the i_data_sem
> > on t
On Monday 04 February 2008 5:12:28 am Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is with the new ext3 -> ext4 migrate code added. The recently added
> lockdep for jbd2 helped to find this out. We want to hold the i_data_sem
> on the ext3 inode during migration to prevent walking the ext3 inode
> when i
ile truncation and new blocks being added while converting to ext4.
Also we dont want to reserve large number of credits for journal.
Any idea how to fix this ?
-aneesh
===
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.24-rc8
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 22:25:18 +0100
Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> * Aneesh Kumar K.V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ===
> > [ INFO: possible circular locking depend
* Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 22:25:18 +0100
> Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > * Aneesh Kumar K.V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > ========
* Aneesh Kumar K.V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ===
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.24-rc3 #6
> ---
> bash/2294 is trying to acqu
===
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.24-rc3 #6
---
bash/2294 is trying to acquire lock:
(&journal->j_list_lock){--..}, at: []
journal_try_to_free_buffers+0x7
15 matches
Mail list logo
