xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: TAKE 981498 - Use KM_NOFS for debug trace buffers

To: Bhagi rathi <jahnu77@xxxxxxxxx>, Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: TAKE 981498 - Use KM_NOFS for debug trace buffers
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2008 06:27:46 +1000
In-reply-to: <20080806201957.GQ21635@disturbed>
Mail-followup-to: Bhagi rathi <jahnu77@xxxxxxxxx>, Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <20080806061553.A8D8958C52A4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <cc7060690808061012x43511581m15c794e72129becc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080806201957.GQ21635@disturbed>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 06:19:57AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 10:42:15PM +0530, Bhagi rathi wrote:
> > I couldn't get a chance to read the diff's completely. If I click on
> > Lachlan's url for diff's, I couldn't access them. It looks to me that
> > the issue is not just with trace buffers. It can extend to xfs_iformat
> > as well. The same dead-lock can spring via
> > 
> > xfs_iread -> xfs_iformat -> xfs_iformat_extents -> xfs_iext_add ->
> > xfs_iext_inline_to_direct -> which can do kmem_alloc with
> > KM_SLEEP flag.
> 
> Fixed already:
> 
> 

Hmmm. where did that url go? Try again:


Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


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