| To: | Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: XFS crash on linux raid |
| From: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 04 May 2007 09:55:30 -0500 |
| Cc: | David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20070504152546.614374ac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20070503164521.16efe075@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070504005922.GC32602149@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070504090613.7c0f97d3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070504073344.GL32602149@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070504152546.614374ac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Macintosh/20070326) |
Emmanuel Florac wrote: Le Fri, 4 May 2007 17:33:44 +1000 David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> écrivait:Well, there's your problem. Stack overflows. IMO, if you use a filesystem, you shouldn't use 4k stacks. ;) If you remake you kernel with 8k stacks then your problems will most likely go away.Well, I've double-checked the asm-i386/module.h, and it actually looks like 4K stacks is NOT the default, so I must be using 8K, isn't it? Depends on how you config'd it, just look at the .config you built with, and search for CONFIG_4KSTACKS On Fedora at least (and I can't remember - I don't think this is a fedora-ism...) you can do "modinfo" on some module, and see: vermagic: 2.6.21 SMP mod_unload 686 4KSTACKS -Eric |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: XFS crash on linux raid, Emmanuel Florac |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS crash on linux raid, Emmanuel Florac |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XFS crash on linux raid, Emmanuel Florac |
| Next by Thread: | Re: XFS crash on linux raid, Emmanuel Florac |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |