From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC6167F60 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 18:44:47 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89632304032 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 16:44:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.129]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id w8gj7OHJ4b0bEK20 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:44:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 11:44:42 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: xfs deadlock on buffer semaphore while reading directory Message-ID: <20130206004442.GS2667@dastard> References: <20130202192007.GS30577@one.firstfloor.org> <510D6EDE.1080409@sgi.com> <510E054B.2070500@tlinx.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <510E054B.2070500@tlinx.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Linda Walsh Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 10:35:55PM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote: > > > Mark Tinguely wrote: > >On 02/02/13 13:20, Andi Kleen wrote: > >> > >>On a older 3.6-rc9 opensuse kernel I had the following deadlock with > > > >That looks like a hang fixed by the series: > > > > http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-12/msg00071.html > ---- > > That may be so -- I used to see things like that on some older > kernels with random progs but with traces down in xfs.. > > Seemed to be rare and not cause problems....but don't notice those any > more... > > Odd thing about my current probs -- my current system has been > up 12 days...but before that it had been up 43 days... > > > I can't get the buffers to 'free' no matter what > echo 3> /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches does nothing. What buffers are you talking about? The deadlock is in metadata buffer handling, which you can't directly see, and will never be able to entirely free via drop caches. if you are talking about what is reported by the "free" command, then that number can be ignored as it is mostly meaningless for XFS filesystems.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs