On 11/27, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:20:22 +0100
> > Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> do_exit->release_task->mark_inode_dirty_sync->schedule() (will never
> >> come back to run journal_stop)
> >
> > I don'
Nacked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't see why the schedule() will not return? Because the task has
> PF_EXITING set? Doesn't TASK_DEAD do that?
This appears to be a work around for an old bug only present in sles9.
It looks lik
Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> So you may need to apply this one too (this one is needed to fix the
>> second bug, my previous patch is needed after applying this one):
>
> thinking what happened once already, I think this would be more
> debuggable but maybe not... dunno.
Pl
Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 02:38:52PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> I don't see why the schedule() will not return? Because the task has
>> PF_EXITING set? Doesn't TASK_DEAD do that?
>
> Ouch, I assumed you couldn't sleep safely anymore in release_tas
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 02:21:29AM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 02:38:52PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > I don't see why the schedule() will not return? Because the task has
> > PF_EXITING set? Doesn't TASK_DEAD do that?
>
> Ouch, I assumed you couldn't sleep safely
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:20:22 +0100
> Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> this patch fixes a sles9 system hang in start_this_handle from a
>> customer with some heavy workload where all tasks are waiting on
>> kjournald to commit t
On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 02:38:52PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> I don't see why the schedule() will not return? Because the task has
> PF_EXITING set? Doesn't TASK_DEAD do that?
Ouch, I assumed you couldn't sleep safely anymore in release_task
given it's the function that will free the task str
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:20:22 +0100
Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this patch fixes a sles9 system hang in start_this_handle from a
> customer with some heavy workload where all tasks are waiting on
> kjournald to commit the transaction, but kjournald waits on t_updates
> to
Hi,
this patch fixes a sles9 system hang in start_this_handle from a
customer with some heavy workload where all tasks are waiting on
kjournald to commit the transaction, but kjournald waits on t_updates
to go down to zero (it never does). This was reported as a lowmem
shortage deadlock but when c
9 matches
Mail list logo