[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfstests: failure to umount ext4

To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: xfstests: failure to umount ext4
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 10:45:24 -0500
Cc: XFS <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <AANLkTi=JvL6LoL=VOrHoiQKheqzDrVwOQtWAkumzaBk5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <AANLkTi=NKxmvJx_oEpdeMtfU9ePv4ofG5PjCuh23RJ+A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D8A0A70.9030201@xxxxxxxxxx> <AANLkTi=JvL6LoL=VOrHoiQKheqzDrVwOQtWAkumzaBk5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv: Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9
On 3/23/11 10:33 AM, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 3/23/11 9:36 AM, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> I've been running xfstests on ext4 and I always get annoying failures to 
>>>> umount:
>>>> 213 8s ... 31s
>>>> umount: /mnt/test/ext4: device is busy.
>>>>        (In some cases useful info about processes that use
>>>>         the device is found by lsof(8) or fuser(1))
>>>> post 198 mostly fails to umount as well.
>>>> and post 124 always fails to umount.
>>>> My server is Ubuntu 10.10, running kernel 2.6.38.
>>>> Is there any known issue about this? because I could find it on google
>>>> or on the XFS list.
>>> Hi All,
>>> Has anyone seen these failures when running xfstests on ext4?
>>> My test and scratch partitions are dedicated for xfstests.
>> I've not seen it, can you investigate with lsof etc?
> OK. I have not given complete information.
> It does not fail indefinably. I can umount the fs immediately after the 
> failure.
> Only the test fails because fsck sees a mounted fs.
> There must be a bit of a delay in the umount that causes the problem.
>> They both work for me on a quick test, anyway, on a .38
>> kernel.
> Problem existed for me in .37 as well. I don't think it is kernel (or
> fs) related.
> I think it is a system problem, but I fall short of ideas how to fix it.
>> What are you using for your partitions under test?
> Currently, I have /dev/sda5,6,7,8.
> I used to work with LVM, but lstat64 didn't like the /dev/mapper links,
> so I switched to raw partitions.
> Although I was puzzled that xfstests could not work over LVM partitions
> It could when I changed lstat64 to stat64, but then I changed it back
> thinking it was causing my problems.

I tried to fix lvm, once, but all the dev symlinks vs. mtab vs.
/proc/mounts was a rat's nest, and I gave up... :)

>> -Eric
>>> Thanks,
>>> Amir.

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