From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 22:26:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 22:26:56 -0500 Received: from tone.orchestra.cse.unsw.EDU.AU ([129.94.242.28]:11153 "HELO tone.orchestra.cse.unsw.EDU.AU") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 22:26:55 -0500 From: Neil Brown To: scott-kernel@thomasons.org Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:37:29 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15982.43897.703221.456961@notabene.cse.unsw.edu.au> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: bio too big device In-Reply-To: message from scott thomason on Tuesday March 11 References: <200303112055.31854.scott-kernel@thomasons.org> X-Mailer: VM 7.08 under Emacs 20.7.2 X-face: [Gw_3E*Gng}4rRrKRYotwlE?.2|**#s9D I frequently receive this message in my syslog, apparently > whenever there are periods of significant write activity: > > bio too big device ide0(3,7) (256 > 255) > bio too big device ide1(22,6) (256 > 255) > > It's worth noting that on this system I have had ongoing trouble > with system stability during write activity as well, using a > wide variety of 2.5.x kernels, even though at the time of this > symptom things are apparently running fine. > > Filesystems are all ext3 on top soft raid0 devices. This happens > to be 2.5.64, but it has been happening for at least the last > 5-6 versions. > > Ideas? Any further debugging output I can provide? raid0 doesn't really work well in 2.5 yet.... as you have noticed. We really need to grab the bio splitting code out of md/dm.c and use it to split bios that are too big or that cross device boundaries. any volunteers?? NeilBrown