xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [BUG] spinlock lockup on CPU#0

To: Fabio Coatti <cova@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [BUG] spinlock lockup on CPU#0
From: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 16:21:47 +0200
Cc: Felix Blyakher <felixb@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=uGIFusYmNceBiz3Vn3dTLRz1lgLMhjqu4IQtuYR+xMU=; b=l9oaVcYtaC47Wd0rwfQFeQbsilxuHUvIBRW8jAL/A62bQSKfq8cR/HJbWzLSaBrCOM M9QOcNVr22in05aqjQ2xi47HKWRawAdX72SFRHd0j+V7TUlNk5Oiapc4SMaNiqBdsW+m L2noYTZmTEjTjMyUqIdi8gCqTvya65ConbA90=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=q/5RAAg34sxyHan/Qy1gPIsLYOGCCNC7VKWCD1B7DvrsTJppkmgIVmsWBZs67mFA72 MxdbRK+N6lZEAD+58WfP7KtZt/AVgzLn6tBYrkq+MpCI2+ouHBZdeB9VbHMRODa+GcGg H03QYpbt80VHgTRiGHgssqzjEmZAXyOQRQc3k=
In-reply-to: <19f34abd0904090707v7eb8b677gbda42595aa04a090@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <200903301936.08477.cova@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <19f34abd0904090707v7eb8b677gbda42595aa04a090@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
2009/4/9 Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@xxxxxxxxx>:
> 2009/3/30 Fabio Coatti <cova@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> Hi all, I've got the following BUG: report on one of our servers running
>> 2.6.28.8; some background:
>> we are seeing several lockups in db (mysql) servers that shows up as a sudden
>> load increase and then, very quickly, the server freezes. It happens in a
>> random way, sometimes after weeks, sometimes very quickly after a system
>> reboot. Trying to discover the problem we installed latest (at the time of
>> test) 2.6.28.X kernel and loaded it with some high disk I/O operations (find,
>> dd, rsync and so on).

[...]

>> Could someone give us some hints about this issue, or at least some
>> suggestions on how to dig it? Of course we can do any sort of testing and
>> tries.
>
> You _could_ also try something like the attached patch. It's
> completely untested, and could lead to data loss (depending on whether
> the callers of this function expects/handles the error condition
> gracefully). I really have no idea. If you try, be sure to back up
> your data first. Good luck :-)

Actually, I think you can forget about this patch. At least that's not
the point of problem in the stack-trace you posted. (My suggestion of
trying a different filesystem still holds, though.)

:-/


Vegard

-- 
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
        -- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036

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