xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Important regression with XFS update for 2.6.24-rc6

To: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx>, Peter Leckie <pleckie@xxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Important regression with XFS update for 2.6.24-rc6
From: Damien Wyart <damien.wyart@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 12:28:04 +0100
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Hello,

As a follow-up to
<http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=119796120524618&w=2> (LKML seems
down right now so I am not linking to it), I have detected an important
problem with these two patches: after applying them by hand (downloaded
them raw from SGI's gitweb) on top of 2.6.24-rc5-git5 (they have not yet
been pulled into mainline by Linux as of this morning) for testing
purposes, I noticed upon reboot that "ls -l" on directories with many
files and subdirectories (around 5000 entries) takes several hundreds of
MB in RAM and then dies with "memory exhausted" error.

I also noticed that ldconfig takes a lot of time to complete, and
firefox seems also to eat much more memory than usual. Reverting the two
patches (going back to vanilla rc5-git5) makes these problems go away.
I am not able to test right now if only one of the patches is bogus or
if both of them are concerned.

As the symptoms are easy to reproduce, I guess this is some kind of
brown paper bag bug and will be easy for XFS experts to spot.


Best,

-- 
Damien Wyart


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