-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Jens, did this get lost in the shuffle, or just miss the window for
3.10 and will go in 3.11?
On 4/4/2013 4:30 PM, Phillip Susi wrote:
>> I have not tested it yet, but I am pretty sure it won't work.
>> It looks like the patch changes the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Jens, did this get lost in the shuffle, or just miss the window for
3.10 and will go in 3.11?
On 4/4/2013 4:30 PM, Phillip Susi wrote:
I have not tested it yet, but I am pretty sure it won't work.
It looks like the patch changes the BLKRRPART
On Tue, Apr 09 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 09:01:39AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 04:30:54PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
> > > > > I have not tested it yet, but I am pretty sure it won't work. It
> > >
On Tue, Apr 09 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 09:01:39AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 04:30:54PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
I have not tested it yet, but I am pretty sure it won't work. It
looks like
On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 09:01:39AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 04:30:54PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
> > > > I have not tested it yet, but I am pretty sure it won't work. It
> > > > looks like the patch changes the BLKRRPART path
On Tue, Apr 09 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 04:30:54PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
> > > I have not tested it yet, but I am pretty sure it won't work. It
> > > looks like the patch changes the BLKRRPART path to go ahead and remove
> > > existing partitions when
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 04:30:54PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
> > I have not tested it yet, but I am pretty sure it won't work. It
> > looks like the patch changes the BLKRRPART path to go ahead and remove
> > existing partitions when GENHD_FL_NO_PARTSCAN is set. loop doesn't
> > issue the
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 04:30:54PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
I have not tested it yet, but I am pretty sure it won't work. It
looks like the patch changes the BLKRRPART path to go ahead and remove
existing partitions when GENHD_FL_NO_PARTSCAN is set. loop doesn't
issue the BLKRRPART
On Tue, Apr 09 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 04:30:54PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
I have not tested it yet, but I am pretty sure it won't work. It
looks like the patch changes the BLKRRPART path to go ahead and remove
existing partitions when GENHD_FL_NO_PARTSCAN is
On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 09:01:39AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 04:30:54PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
I have not tested it yet, but I am pretty sure it won't work. It
looks like the patch changes the BLKRRPART path to go
> I have not tested it yet, but I am pretty sure it won't work. It
> looks like the patch changes the BLKRRPART path to go ahead and remove
> existing partitions when GENHD_FL_NO_PARTSCAN is set. loop doesn't
> issue the BLKRRPART ioctl when !LO_FLAGS_PARTSCAN so this won't help.
> I think loop
I have not tested it yet, but I am pretty sure it won't work. It
looks like the patch changes the BLKRRPART path to go ahead and remove
existing partitions when GENHD_FL_NO_PARTSCAN is set. loop doesn't
issue the BLKRRPART ioctl when !LO_FLAGS_PARTSCAN so this won't help.
I think loop
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 4/3/2013 7:41 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> Thanks for testing! I don't particularly like this stuff in
>> loop, though. It's quite nasty and depends on other behaviour. It
>> would be prettier if we just had rescan_partitions() do the right
>> thing,
"LKML"
> > >
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 5:00:47 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5
> > > running xfstests case #78]
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 02 2013, CAI Qian wrote:
> > > >
&g
, April 2, 2013 5:00:47 PM
Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5
running xfstests case #78]
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, CAI Qian wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jens Axboe ax...@kernel.dk
To: Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 4/3/2013 7:41 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
Thanks for testing! I don't particularly like this stuff in
loop, though. It's quite nasty and depends on other behaviour. It
would be prettier if we just had rescan_partitions() do the right
thing, and only
t; > > > To: "Dave Chinner"
> > > > Cc: "CAI Qian" , x...@oss.sgi.com, "LKML"
> > > >
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 3:30:35 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5
&g
- Original Message -
> From: "Jens Axboe"
> To: "CAI Qian"
> Cc: "Dave Chinner" , x...@oss.sgi.com, "LKML"
>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 5:00:47 PM
> Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5 runnin
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, CAI Qian wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Jens Axboe"
> > To: "Dave Chinner"
> > Cc: "CAI Qian" , x...@oss.sgi.com, "LKML"
> >
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 3:30:35 PM
- Original Message -
> From: "Jens Axboe"
> To: "Dave Chinner"
> Cc: "CAI Qian" , x...@oss.sgi.com, "LKML"
>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 3:30:35 PM
> Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5 ru
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > [Added jens Axboe to CC]
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 02:08:49AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:
> > > Saw on almost all the servers range from x64, ppc64 and s390x with kernel
> > > 3.9-rc5 and xfsprogs-3.1.10. Never
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
> [Added jens Axboe to CC]
>
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 02:08:49AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:
> > Saw on almost all the servers range from x64, ppc64 and s390x with kernel
> > 3.9-rc5 and xfsprogs-3.1.10. Never caught this in 3.9-rc4, so looks like
> >
[Added jens Axboe to CC]
On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 02:08:49AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:
> Saw on almost all the servers range from x64, ppc64 and s390x with kernel
> 3.9-rc5 and xfsprogs-3.1.10. Never caught this in 3.9-rc4, so looks like
> something new broke this. Log is here with sysrq debug info.
[Added jens Axboe to CC]
On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 02:08:49AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:
Saw on almost all the servers range from x64, ppc64 and s390x with kernel
3.9-rc5 and xfsprogs-3.1.10. Never caught this in 3.9-rc4, so looks like
something new broke this. Log is here with sysrq debug info.
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
[Added jens Axboe to CC]
On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 02:08:49AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:
Saw on almost all the servers range from x64, ppc64 and s390x with kernel
3.9-rc5 and xfsprogs-3.1.10. Never caught this in 3.9-rc4, so looks like
something new
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
[Added jens Axboe to CC]
On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 02:08:49AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:
Saw on almost all the servers range from x64, ppc64 and s390x with kernel
3.9-rc5 and xfsprogs-3.1.10. Never caught this
- Original Message -
From: Jens Axboe ax...@kernel.dk
To: Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com
Cc: CAI Qian caiq...@redhat.com, x...@oss.sgi.com, LKML
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 3:30:35 PM
Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9
: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5 running
xfstests case #78]
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
[Added jens Axboe to CC]
On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 02:08:49AM -0400, CAI Qian wrote:
Saw on almost all the servers
, 2013 3:30:35 PM
Subject: Re: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5
running xfstests case #78]
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, Dave Chinner wrote:
[Added jens Axboe to CC]
On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 02:08:49AM -0400, CAI Qian
: Loopback device hung [was Re: xfs deadlock on 3.9-rc5 running
xfstests case #78]
On Tue, Apr 02 2013, CAI Qian wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jens Axboe ax...@kernel.dk
To: Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com
Cc: CAI Qian caiq...@redhat.com, x...@oss.sgi.com, LKML
30 matches
Mail list logo
