On 4/28/14, 12:49 PM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> On 04/28/14 12:26, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 4/28/14, 12:22 PM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
>>> On 04/28/14 12:18, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>>> On 4/28/14, 11:47 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 11:35:16AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>>>>> Similar to xfs_file_fsync(), I think xfs_dir_fsync() needs
>>>>>> to test for a shut down fs,
>>>>>
>>>>> It probably should.
>>>>>
>>>>>> lest we go down paths we'll
>>>>>> never be able to complete; Boris reported that during some
>>>>>> stress tests he had threads stuck in xlog_cil_force_lsn
>>>>>> via xfs_dir_fsync().
>>>>>
>>>>> But this could still happen if we get a shutdown coming in after that
>>>>> test.
>>>>
>>>> True... that looked a bit hairier to sort out. :(
>>>>
>>>> -Eric
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Are the sync lsn look okay? Was there an error writing the iclog buffer?
>>>
>>> xfs_do_force_shutdown() will also do a xlog_cil_force_lsn() via the
>>> xfs_log_force_umount if the log buffer write was not in error. That
>>> should be the same or later than this lsn.
>>
>> I don't have full details, unfortunately, just the sysrq backtraces.
>>
>> -Eric
>>
>>> --Mark.
>
> anything in the log as to what caused the hang? You mention a forced
> shutdown; what caused the forced shutdown?
Perhaps Boris can answer that.
> Is this the latest bits (3.15)?
It was 3.10 with backported xfs bits from about 3.14.
-Eric
> --Mark.
>
|