xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Kernel 2.6.30.4 XFS(..?) regression (& with/2.6.31-rc6)

To: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.6.30.4 XFS(..?) regression (& with/2.6.31-rc6)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 16:15:59 -0400
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908221044420.30321@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908080422440.12329@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <00980BBF-1206-4BEF-A8AE-B4A8DAE7EC27@xxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908090605080.16485@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908110624420.22426@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090816022331.GA2309@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908171024380.12533@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908220624440.30321@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090822142550.GA10003@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908221044420.30321@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05)
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 10:45:13AM -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>> Yes, entirely possible.   All the crypto loop / dm implementation used
>> to have a tendency to never complete I/O once in a while, although that
>> didn't happen anymore recently.
>
> Ok,
>
> What is the best way to debug the issue? git bi-sects between 2.6.29.x 
> and 2.6.31-rc6? or?

Well, that would be a good way to find it.  But I'm personally not
interested in spending much time on debugging a problem if it only
happens with fishy out of tree modules.

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