On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > Boy, that's an annoying bug... it's somewhere in the guts of Red Hat's
> > kernel + nptl patches + O_DIRECT + rpm.
>
> This also bit me with the 20.9 kernel patched to XFS 1.3.0. It seems
> 100% reproducible. :(
>
> Why doesn't this show up with the binary kernels for 19.9? Or does it
> but nobody reported it yet? It also didn't show up with XFS 1.2.0.
I think it does show up in 19.9. For XFS 1.2.0, that was on a different
underlying kernel - or have you merged 1.2.0 up to 2.4.20-19.9?
> > I think that Red Hat will eventually have a new version of RPM that
> > works with this kernel. In the meantime, I'd either:
> >
> > a) rebuild with patch 1300 in place, if you don't care about using O_DIRECT
> > or
> > b) set up an alias for "rpm" to prefix it with LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.2.5
>
> What are the drawbacks of these methods? Simply performance? a) seems
> bad, because it will degrade overall system performance,
Not many things use O_DIRECT, actually. And, well, it won't be any worse
than what Red Hat ships originally - wihch turns off O_DIRECT completely
with 1300. We'd just be putting that back in place.
> b) is
> difficult, because the used rpm application is not under control of
> the kernel packager. :(
not sure what you mean? That not everything will pick up the alias?
-Eric
|