xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: State of XFS on ARM

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: State of XFS on ARM
From: Richard Sharpe <realrichardsharpe@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 07:42:11 -0800
Cc: Daniel Goller <morfic@xxxxxxxxx>, James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
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=zUbvrxwoetXw1avJyC8+qhoCZd6wfcjOX4O6PDDds24=; b=lx5vbisnVHQs6cRb6e/6yHkif2cAZyH4WI08H8yZGizQ3Y/IMle0EIXEM200v1iYrr 8adOolzLS3WXE8+vqSQ0WvbnkQD8BQL4PAxZeJU01acqUFif/DQaVQj62yomOQT3jpxJ sb8qVEqmd/vR1FZg/7D08WSE2Py6shI9berws=
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=n72QJufJLausX446zEj5xpZJ03L2TUjOQzfUPhPBTGM66KIx+9CBiQs4AmLTEkKyrv QlAdUc2eET0ubZspIxEBo0ZOvk3scjhtYoOgdQAnG2Q/3pSXPKK8QHG2ORSboX8nEJzU +qFQ6nRQY64TmaH/w+Eij/UPV+QMj5qu7O3Xw=
In-reply-to: <20100202112300.GA23809@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <13bb8ce11002011924h611099feh4955eedcc6e588a6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100202112300.GA23809@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 3:23 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 09:24:33PM -0600, Daniel Goller wrote:
>> It seems i have not been able to unmount it and then mounting it
>> cleanly once, always required xfs_repair -L   /dev/sdc3
>> I Could understand power issues or lockups causing this, but on clean
>> umount and followed mount to see it fail is surprising.
>> When mounting fails on the headless arm machine i move the drive to a
>> x86_64 and run xfs_repair there when mounting there fails too (so log
>> can't be replayed, making -L necessary).
>> All of this leads me to ask:  "Is XFS as well maintained on ARM as it
>> is on x86/x86_64?"
>
> XFS itself is platform neutral.  But it seems like you have an ARM
> platform with virtually indexed caches, which currently can't support
> the I/O XFS does.  James has been working on fixing this for a while,
> but so far the architecture support patches for it unfortunately still
> haven't made it to mainline despite many people running into this issue.

I would be interested in a precise explanation for this problem. We
ran into an issue here with XFS on the Marvell 78200 (ARM) which has a
VIVT cache. We eventually solved the problem by using
flush_icache_range in a strategic place (after also discovering the
need for flush_dcache_page, but that has to do with doing IO between
the cores on the 78200), but we really did not understand why that
fixed the problem. However, it stopped the corruption we were
experiencing when using a file system exerciser.

(We have subsequently stopped using XFS, but not because of any
corruption issues.)

-- 
Regards,
Richard Sharpe

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