Looks good,
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 01:52:55PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 01:46:48PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > Subject: fs/block_dev.c: Warn on inode writeback failure instead of
> > WARN_ON()
> >
> > If a block device is hot removed and later last reference to devices
Hello,
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 01:46:48PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> Subject: fs/block_dev.c: Warn on inode writeback failure instead of WARN_ON()
>
> If a block device is hot removed and later last reference to devices
> is put, we try to writeback the dirty inode. But device is gone and
> that
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 08:47:21AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 03:28:21PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > > WARN_ON_ONCE(write_inode_now(inode, true))
> > >
> > > If we failed to write back inode, then warning about it sounds right?
> >
> > A warning is fine.. not a W
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 03:28:21PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(write_inode_now(inode, true))
> >
> > If we failed to write back inode, then warning about it sounds right?
>
> A warning is fine.. not a WARN_ON(). Pretty alarming backtrace spew but
> maybe I'm missing something and
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 03:08:15PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 02:16:19PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 18 2015 at 2:08pm -0400,
> > Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > > > Hmm, so you have a filesystem active on it too?
> > >
> > > I unmounted it before.
> > >
> > >
> In that case if I do umount after device has gone away, I can see above
> WARN(). And it does seem to be coming from.
>
> WARN_ON_ONCE(write_inode_now(inode, true))
>
> If we failed to write back inode, then warning about it sounds right?
WARN() is for detecting kernel internal consistency pro
On Thu, Jun 18 2015 at 3:08pm -0400,
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 02:16:19PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 18 2015 at 2:08pm -0400,
> > Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > > > Hmm, so you have a filesystem active on it too?
> > >
> > > I unmounted it before.
> > >
> > > >
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 02:16:19PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18 2015 at 2:08pm -0400,
> Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > > Hmm, so you have a filesystem active on it too?
> >
> > I unmounted it before.
> >
> > >
> > > > Also the VG removal did not work of course.
> > >
> > > Once you
On Thu, Jun 18 2015 at 2:08pm -0400,
Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Hmm, so you have a filesystem active on it too?
>
> I unmounted it before.
>
> >
> > > Also the VG removal did not work of course.
> >
> > Once you resolve the filesystem piece, from vgremove man page:
> >
> > "vgremove allows you
> Hmm, so you have a filesystem active on it too?
I unmounted it before.
>
> > Also the VG removal did not work of course.
>
> Once you resolve the filesystem piece, from vgremove man page:
>
> "vgremove allows you to remove one or more volume groups. If one or
> more physical volumes in the
On Thu, Jun 18 2015 at 12:57pm -0400,
Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> I was trying to remove a LVM logical volume on a hotplugged device
> that had been removed, to also remove its VG, which resulted in:
>
> [1728002.718174] [ cut here ]
> [1728002.718179] WARNING: CPU: 10 PID: 15
I was trying to remove a LVM logical volume on a hotplugged device
that had been removed, to also remove its VG, which resulted in:
[1728002.718174] [ cut here ]
[1728002.718179] WARNING: CPU: 10 PID: 15454 at fs/block_dev.c:57
__blkdev_put+0xc1/0x220()
[1728002.718180] Mo
13 matches
Mail list logo
