[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 2.6.31 xfs_fs_destroy_inode: cannot reclaim

To: Patrick Schreurs <patrick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 2.6.31 xfs_fs_destroy_inode: cannot reclaim
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 11:21:26 -0500
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tommy van Leeuwen <tommy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Bas Couwenberg <bas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XFS List <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <4AF0422D.1070104@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20091012233854.GA29446@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091019011600.GO9464@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091019035426.GB18296@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091020034048.GA9464@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <89c4f90c0910210245h4691cd82hd1d63f5ed72fb2e3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091022085937.GA2039@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <89c4f90c0910270341r7833f490g60810f2817eb0950@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <89c4f90c0910280519k759230c1r7b1586932ac792f7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091030101601.GA11142@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4AF0422D.1070104@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05)
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 03:46:05PM +0100, Patrick Schreurs wrote:
> We're back to 2.6.28 at the moment. Please advice if we can do anything  
> to assist.
> Any clue why we seem to be the only one hitting this problem? It might  
> have something to do with the short term data retention on these  
> particular servers. All partitions are always 100% full and data is only  
> kept for a couple of days.

Sorry for the lack of updates, been travelling and working a lot and
didn't have much time to look at your screen dumps.  I really wish where
the magic offset for the NULL pointer dereference comes from.  The 100%
full might be a pretty good hint that is has to deal with ENOSPC
handling somewhere.  I don't know of anything you can help me with for
now, but will come back as soon as I have something more.

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