[Top] [All Lists]

Re: patch: double freereq freeing

To: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: patch: double freereq freeing
From: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 15:46:49 -0600
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <20001210215635.E294@xxxxxxx> <3A33F25C.5E9FAB1C@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20001210222057.F294@xxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Jens Axboe wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 10 2000, Russell Cattelan wrote:
> > > This looks like a merge error. I sent this to Russell last week too,
> > > when investigating the recent kio/elevator problems. It's not critical,
> > > blkdev_release_request clears rq->q and thus it will not be freed
> > > twice.
> >
> > I have that one in the tree with the elevator patch.
> > I never got around to checking that particular fix in.
> Ah ok, so it didn't get completely lost :-)
> > BTW as far as your elevator patch goes do you know if
> > will be part of test12?
> I haven't submitted it, so test12 is unlikely. Next version
> perhaps, at least some parts of it. Depends on Linus and what
> he thinks at this point.
> In any way, I can merge it into the xfs tree if there's an interest.

I have discovered a corruption problem when using kiobuf io.
I occurs both in the XFS-test11 tree and with your elevator patch.
So it does appear to be the fault of the patch,
although it does occur sooner with the elevator patch in.

Currently our doio test can completely starve out log requests,
thus by blocking out any new file system activity.
Your patch does a good job of clean up the starvation problem so
yes we do want to incorporate it.
We do need to figure out were the corruption is coming from

> --
> * Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxx>
> * SuSE Labs

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