Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Repeatable\s+Panics\s+with\s+XFS\s+and\s+RAID1\s+$long$\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Repeatable\s+Panics\s+with\s+XFS\s+and\s+RAID1\s+$long$\s*$/: 18 ]

Total 18 documents matching your query.

1. Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxx>; Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 14:13:23 -0500; In my testing, I can produce various problems with XFS and RAID1. I'll reproduce three scenarios below. First, my test configuration is: Intel Celeron @ 566 MHz, 64 MB RAM, 4 45 GB IDE drives, two o; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00279.html (12,703 bytes)
2. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxx>; Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 21:03:16 +0000; I'm sure these problems are due to the flag change in kmalloc: GFP_KERNEL -> GFP_BUFFER. Changing the flag has cleaned up some deadlock situations but apparently has exposed some out of memory situat; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00281.html (8,915 bytes)
3. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxx); Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:55:50 -0800; For those seeing __alloc_pages failing, can you please try this patch? With recent code changes, writepage() is used for flushing dirty pages, and this typically happens under memory pressure. So, do; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00283.html (9,274 bytes)
4. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 07:44:33 -0200 (BRST); Ananth, I think allocating memory from the atomic queue (used mainly by in interrupt context) to generate dirty data may cause problems.; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00294.html (8,724 bytes)
5. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 07:56:17 -0200 (BRST); I'll write the GFP_PAGE_IO thing we talked about RSN to avoid having to use GFP_ATOMIC.; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00295.html (9,101 bytes)
6. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 09:32:48 -0200 (BRST); <snip> Hi, Could you please try the following patch against current XFS tree and report results? You still need the pagbuf -> pagebuf typo patch you just sent on top of this to make it compile. Thank; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00300.html (14,048 bytes)
7. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 11:26:56 -0800; Hi Marcelo, The particular allocation in question, the kmalloc in __pagebuf_write_full_page, is needed only to perform clustering. So, what's needed is a really cheap allocation; the code doesn't car; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00310.html (8,922 bytes)
8. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 15:57:55 -0500; Well, as I reported earlier, it still fails on my machine. The failure is not a panic, the kernel produces one-to-many '__alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed' messages, and the process stops, in; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00313.html (9,424 bytes)
9. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxx>; Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:37:19 -0200 (BRST); Ananth, Steve, I think that using kmalloc() for allocations of memory which purpose is clustering is not very interesting. The code is currently allocating 4k to hold the page pointers on the cluster; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00343.html (10,960 bytes)
10. Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 14:13:23 -0500; In my testing, I can produce various problems with XFS and RAID1. I'll reproduce three scenarios below. First, my test configuration is: Intel Celeron @ 566 MHz, 64 MB RAM, 4 45 GB IDE drives, two o; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00738.html (12,703 bytes)
11. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: ak@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 21:03:16 +0000; I'm sure these problems are due to the flag change in kmalloc: GFP_KERNEL -> GFP_BUFFER. Changing the flag has cleaned up some deadlock situations but apparently has exposed some out of memory situat; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00740.html (8,915 bytes)
12. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxx); Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:55:50 -0800; For those seeing __alloc_pages failing, can you please try this patch? With recent code changes, writepage() is used for flushing dirty pages, and this typically happens under memory pressure. So, do; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00742.html (9,274 bytes)
13. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 07:44:33 -0200 (BRST); Ananth, I think allocating memory from the atomic queue (used mainly by in interrupt context) to generate dirty data may cause problems.; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00753.html (8,724 bytes)
14. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 07:56:17 -0200 (BRST); I'll write the GFP_PAGE_IO thing we talked about RSN to avoid having to use GFP_ATOMIC.; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00754.html (9,101 bytes)
15. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: @xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 09:32:48 -0200 (BRST); <snip> Hi, Could you please try the following patch against current XFS tree and report results? You still need the pagbuf -> pagebuf typo patch you just sent on top of this to make it compile. Thank; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00759.html (14,048 bytes)
16. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: lus@xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 11:26:56 -0800; Hi Marcelo, The particular allocation in question, the kmalloc in __pagebuf_write_full_page, is needed only to perform clustering. So, what's needed is a really cheap allocation; the code doesn't car; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00769.html (8,922 bytes)
17. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: rd@xxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 15:57:55 -0500; Well, as I reported earlier, it still fails on my machine. The failure is not a panic, the kernel produces one-to-many '__alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed' messages, and the process stops, in; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00772.html (9,424 bytes)
18. Re: Repeatable Panics with XFS and RAID1 (long) (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:37:19 -0200 (BRST); Ananth, Steve, I think that using kmalloc() for allocations of memory which purpose is clustering is not very interesting. The code is currently allocating 4k to hold the page pointers on the cluster; /archives/xfs/2001-02/msg00802.html (10,960 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 18
Page: [1]