and i haven't seen it either... neil do you think your latest patch was
hiding the bug? 'cause there was an iteration of an earlier patch which
didn't produce much spam in dmesg but the bug was still there, then there
is the version below which spams dmesg a fair amount but i didn't see the
Hi all,
Neil Brown wrote:
On Tuesday October 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Very happy to. Let me know what you'd like me to do.
Cool thanks.
(snip)
I don't know if it's useful information, but I'm encountering the same
problem here, in a totally different situation. I'm using
Ok, after more testing, this lockup happens consistently when
bitmaps are switched on and never when they are switched off.
Ideas anybody?
On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 12:25:46AM +0100, Chris Allen wrote:
Neil Brown wrote:
On Tuesday June 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Will that fix be in
On Monday October 9, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, after more testing, this lockup happens consistently when
bitmaps are switched on and never when they are switched off.
Ideas anybody?
No. I'm completely stumped.
Which means it is probably something very obvious, but I keep looking
in the
Neil Brown wrote:
On Monday October 9, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, after more testing, this lockup happens consistently when
bitmaps are switched on and never when they are switched off.
Are you happy to try a kernel.org kernel with a few patches and a
little shell script running?
On Tuesday October 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Very happy to. Let me know what you'd like me to do.
Cool thanks.
At the end is a patch against 2.6.17.11, though it should apply against
any later 2.6.17 kernel.
Apply this and reboot.
Then run
while true
do cat
Neil Brown wrote:
On Tuesday June 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Will that fix be in 2.6.17?
Probably not. We have had the last 'rc' twice and I so I don't think
it is appropriate to submit the patch at this stage.
I probably will submit it for an early 2.6.17.x. and for 2.6.16.y.
On Friday June 2, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 1 Jun 2006, Neil Brown wrote:
I've got one more long-shot I would like to try first. If you could
backout that change to ll_rw_block, and apply this patch instead.
Then when it hangs, just cat the stripe_cache_active file and see if
On Tuesday May 30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 30 May 2006, Neil Brown wrote:
Could you try this patch please? On top of the rest.
And if it doesn't fail in a couple of days, tell me how regularly the
message
kblockd_schedule_work failed
gets printed.
i'm running this
On Tuesday May 30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
actually i think the rate is higher... i'm not sure why, but klogd doesn't
seem to keep up with it:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# grep -c kblockd_schedule_work /var/log/messages
31
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# dmesg | grep -c kblockd_schedule_work
8192
# grep
On Wed, 31 May 2006, Neil Brown wrote:
On Tuesday May 30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
actually i think the rate is higher... i'm not sure why, but klogd doesn't
seem to keep up with it:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# grep -c kblockd_schedule_work /var/log/messages
31
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~#
On Sun, 28 May 2006, Neil Brown wrote:
The following patch adds some more tracing to raid5, and might fix a
subtle bug in ll_rw_blk, though it is an incredible long shot that
this could be affecting raid5 (if it is, I'll have to assume there is
another bug somewhere). It certainly doesn't
On Saturday May 27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 27 May 2006, Neil Brown wrote:
Thanks. This narrows it down quite a bit... too much infact: I can
now say for sure that this cannot possible happen :-)
2/ The message.gz you sent earlier with the
echo t
On Tue, 23 May 2006, Neil Brown wrote:
I've spent all morning looking at this and while I cannot see what is
happening I did find a couple of small bugs, so that is good...
I've attached three patches. The first fix two small bugs (I think).
The last adds some extra information to
On Friday May 26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 23 May 2006, Neil Brown wrote:
i applied them against 2.6.16.18 and two days later i got my first hang...
below is the stripe_cache foo.
thanks
-dean
neemlark:~# cd /sys/block/md4/md/
neemlark:/sys/block/md4/md# cat
On Sat, 27 May 2006, Neil Brown wrote:
On Friday May 26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 23 May 2006, Neil Brown wrote:
i applied them against 2.6.16.18 and two days later i got my first hang...
below is the stripe_cache foo.
thanks
-dean
neemlark:~# cd /sys/block/md4/md/
On Wednesday May 17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2006, dean gaudet wrote:
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006, Neil Brown wrote:
On Monday March 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just experienced some kind of lockup accessing my 8-drive raid5
(2.6.16-rc4-mm2). The system has been up
On Wednesday May 17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
let me know if you want the task dump output from this one too.
No thanks - I doubt it will containing anything helpful.
I'll try to put some serious time into this next week - as soon as I
get mdadm 2.5 out.
NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from
On Thu, 11 May 2006, dean gaudet wrote:
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006, Neil Brown wrote:
On Monday March 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just experienced some kind of lockup accessing my 8-drive raid5
(2.6.16-rc4-mm2). The system has been up for 16 days running fine, but
now processes that try
On Monday March 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I just experienced some kind of lockup accessing my 8-drive raid5
(2.6.16-rc4-mm2). The system has been up for 16 days running fine, but
now processes that try to read the md device hang. ps tells me they are
all sleeping in
20 matches
Mail list logo
