xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Kernel 2.6.19.2 New RAID 5 Bug (oops when writing Samba -> RAID5)

To: Michael Tokarev <mjt@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.6.19.2 New RAID 5 Bug (oops when writing Samba -> RAID5)
From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 06:59:19 -0500 (EST)
Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Alan Piszcz <ap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <45B5ECAA.6000100@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701200718290.29223@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <45B5261B.1050104@xxxxxxxxxx> <17845.13256.284461.992275@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701230556050.8978@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <45B5ECAA.6000100@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Michael Tokarev wrote:

> Justin Piszcz wrote:
> []
> > Is this a bug that can or will be fixed or should I disable pre-emption on 
> > critical and/or server machines?
> 
> Disabling pre-emption on critical and/or server machines seems to be a good
> idea in the first place.  IMHO anyway.. ;)
> 
> /mjt
> 

So for a server system, the following options should be as follows:

Preemption Model (No Forced Preemption (Server))  --->
[ ] Preempt The Big Kernel Lock

Also, my mobo has HPET timer support in the BIOS, is there any reason to 
use this on a server? I do run X on it via the Intel 965 chipset video.

So bottom line is make sure not to use preemption on servers or else you 
will get weird spinlock/deadlocks on RAID devices--GOOD To know!

Thanks!

Justin.


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