xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: oops on umount

To: lord@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: oops on umount
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 17:29:20 +0200
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200003301500.JAA14782@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from lord@xxxxxxx on Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 09:00:38AM -0600
References: <200003301500.JAA14782@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.1.11i
On Thu, Mar 30 2000, lord@xxxxxxx wrote:
> > Looks like it tried to grab a spin lock in use and got caught by
> > the nmi watchdog.
> 
> Hmm, this one could be fun - I suspect we have one thread using a buffer

Indeed.

> while another one is attempting to free it.... I have definitely seen
> problems in this area. CONFIG_PAGE_BUF_META is going to be a fairly
> delicate area for a while, we have implemented a totally new buffering
> system underneath XFS - and it does not have exactly the same behavior
> as the original irix one.

Okay, this brings me to another point - what is your preferred bug
report style? kdb or ksymoops? Should the PAGE_BUF_META options
be enabled? Etc.

> > xfs_iomap_write returning ERROR 28
> > write, delalloc. add some code here
> 
> Congratulations! I think you are the first person to fill a disk on XFS on
> Linux. The delalloc one is a bit wierd, but could be explained by the lack
> of any check in the new I/O code for ENOSPC.

It was a small 1.3GB partition :)

-- 
*  Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxx>
*  Linux CD/DVD-ROM, SuSE Labs
*  http://kernel.dk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>