On Fri, 02 Feb 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 16:25:41 -0800 Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 12:56:30 -0800
> > Andrew Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > dt of=/dev/raw/raw1 procs=8 oncerr=abort bs=16k disable=stats
> > > > > limit=2m passes=1
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 16:25:41 -0800 Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 12:56:30 -0800
> Andrew Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > dt of=/dev/raw/raw1 procs=8 oncerr=abort bs=16k disable=stats
> > > > limit=2m passes=100 pattern=iot dlimit=2048
>
> What is this mysteri
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 12:56:30 -0800
Andrew Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > dt of=/dev/raw/raw1 procs=8 oncerr=abort bs=16k disable=stats
> > > limit=2m passes=100 pattern=iot dlimit=2048
What is this mysterious dt command, btw?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "u
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 12:56:30 -0800
Andrew Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Feb 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 10:35:10 -0800 Andrew Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Basically what is happening from the FC side is the initiator executes
> > > a simple dt
On Thu, 01 Feb 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 10:35:10 -0800 Andrew Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Basically what is happening from the FC side is the initiator executes
> > a simple dt test:
> >
> > dt of=/dev/raw/raw1 procs=8 oncerr=abort bs=16k disable=stats
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 10:35:10 -0800 Andrew Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All,
>
> We've been trying to track down a nagging regression seen during some
> port-disable/enable testing. The problem occurs anywhere from
> 20 minutes to 120 minutes of testing under very minimal I/O load:
>
>
All,
We've been trying to track down a nagging regression seen during some
port-disable/enable testing. The problem occurs anywhere from
20 minutes to 120 minutes of testing under very minimal I/O load:
[ 1143.890598] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
0028
7 matches
Mail list logo