From: Peter Klotz <peter.klotz99@gmail.com>
To: Guus Sliepen <Guus.Sliepen@astro.su.se>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Roman Kononov <kernel@kononov.ftml.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: BUG: soft lockup - is this XFS problem?
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 20:03:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E1F2F5D.8060505@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110714112324.GM30145@sliepen.org>
On 07/14/2011 01:23 PM, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> I'm having a problem with a system having an XFS filesystem on RAID locking up
> fairly consistently when writing large amounts of data to it, with several
> kernels, including 2.6.38.2 and 2.6.39.3, on both AMD and Intel multi-core
> processors. The kernel always logs this several times:
>
> BUG: soft lockup - CPU#2 stuck for 67s! [kswapd0:33]
...
>> I believe this patch should solve it. Please test and confirm before
>> I send it upstream.
>
> Further comments on that thread in 2009 indicated the patch was very useful,
> but it doesn't seem to have been applied upstream. Is there any reason this
> patch should not be applied?
Hello Guus
This Bugzilla entry documents the XFS bug from 2009 in detail including
links:
http://oss.sgi.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=805
The problem was finally solved by a patch proposed by Linus. This is the
reason the original patch developed by Nick never made it into the kernel.
My tests back then showed that both patches fixed the problem.
It seems you have found a test case where just Nick's patch helps.
Regards, Peter.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Klotz <peter.klotz99@gmail.com>
To: Guus Sliepen <Guus.Sliepen@astro.su.se>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Roman Kononov <kernel@kononov.ftml.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: BUG: soft lockup - is this XFS problem?
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 20:03:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E1F2F5D.8060505@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110714112324.GM30145@sliepen.org>
On 07/14/2011 01:23 PM, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> I'm having a problem with a system having an XFS filesystem on RAID locking up
> fairly consistently when writing large amounts of data to it, with several
> kernels, including 2.6.38.2 and 2.6.39.3, on both AMD and Intel multi-core
> processors. The kernel always logs this several times:
>
> BUG: soft lockup - CPU#2 stuck for 67s! [kswapd0:33]
...
>> I believe this patch should solve it. Please test and confirm before
>> I send it upstream.
>
> Further comments on that thread in 2009 indicated the patch was very useful,
> but it doesn't seem to have been applied upstream. Is there any reason this
> patch should not be applied?
Hello Guus
This Bugzilla entry documents the XFS bug from 2009 in detail including
links:
http://oss.sgi.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=805
The problem was finally solved by a patch proposed by Linus. This is the
reason the original patch developed by Nick never made it into the kernel.
My tests back then showed that both patches fixed the problem.
It seems you have found a test case where just Nick's patch helps.
Regards, Peter.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-14 18:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-19 6:59 BUG: soft lockup - is this XFS problem? Roman Kononov
2008-12-23 17:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-12-23 17:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-12-30 4:23 ` Nick Piggin
2008-12-30 4:23 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-03 21:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-01-03 21:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-01-05 1:48 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 1:48 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 4:19 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 4:19 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 6:48 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 6:48 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 14:25 ` Roman Kononov
2009-01-05 14:25 ` Roman Kononov
2009-01-05 16:21 ` Peter Klotz
2009-01-05 16:21 ` Peter Klotz
2009-01-05 16:41 ` [patch] mm: fix lockless pagecache reordering bug (was Re: BUG: soft lockup - is this XFS problem?) Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 16:41 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 16:41 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 17:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 17:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 17:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 18:00 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 18:00 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 18:00 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 18:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 18:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 18:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 19:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 19:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 19:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-06 17:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06 17:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06 17:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 20:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 20:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 20:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 20:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 20:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 20:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 21:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 21:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 21:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06 2:05 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-06 2:05 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-06 2:05 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-06 2:23 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06 2:23 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06 2:23 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06 2:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-06 2:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-06 2:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-06 8:38 ` Peter Klotz
2009-01-06 8:38 ` Peter Klotz
2009-01-06 8:38 ` Peter Klotz
2009-01-06 8:43 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-06 8:43 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-06 8:43 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-06 16:16 ` Roman Kononov
2009-01-06 16:16 ` Roman Kononov
2009-01-06 16:16 ` Roman Kononov
2009-01-05 21:04 ` [patch] mm: fix lockless pagecache reordering bug (was Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-05 21:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-05 21:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-05 21:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 21:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 21:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-14 11:23 ` BUG: soft lockup - is this XFS problem? Guus Sliepen
2011-07-14 11:23 ` Guus Sliepen
2011-07-14 18:03 ` Peter Klotz [this message]
2011-07-14 18:03 ` Peter Klotz
2011-07-14 19:29 ` Guus Sliepen
2011-07-14 19:29 ` Guus Sliepen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4E1F2F5D.8060505@gmail.com \
--to=peter.klotz99@gmail.com \
--cc=Guus.Sliepen@astro.su.se \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=kernel@kononov.ftml.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.