[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Assertion failed: atomic_read(&mp->m_active_trans)

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Assertion failed: atomic_read(&mp->m_active_trans)
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 08:39:50 +1100
Cc: Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20081203104849.GF15485@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Mail-followup-to: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <492BB095.1000104@xxxxxxx> <4934AAA9.5090405@xxxxxxx> <20081203104849.GF15485@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 05:48:49AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I'd rather fix it properly.

Sure, but in the mean time, I'd suggest changing it to a WARN_ON()
rather than an ASSERT(). That way we'll continue to have ppl bug us
about it until the VFS can support read-only remounts without racing

Has that work been dropped on the floor, Christoph? We've
been holding off removing this ASSERT or adding the hack
I did to work around the common case of the assert triggering
based on the fact that the problem in the VFS would be fixed
in the next release. That was the case each release since
2.6.25 and there doesn't seem to be much progress...

> Do you guys have a somewhat reliable
> testcase hitting it?

I used to have one of the xfsqa tests hit it every so often,
but not what you'd call reliably....


Dave Chinner

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