On Fri, 04 Dec 2015 18:02:58 +0100,
Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> On 12/04/2015 09:59 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 20:01:47 +0100,
> > Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> >>
> >> On 11/25/2015 07:01 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Nov 25 2015 at 4:04am -0500,
> >>> Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>
On 12/04/2015 09:59 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 20:01:47 +0100,
Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 11/25/2015 07:01 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25 2015 at 4:04am -0500,
Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 11/20/2015 04:28 PM, Ewan Milne wrote:
On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 15:55 +0100, Hanne
Trace:
[ 137.211373] [] dump_stack+0x4b/0x72
[ 137.211378] [] warn_slowpath_common+0x82/0xc0
[ 137.211383] [] warn_slowpath_null+0x1a/0x20
[ 137.211387] [] blk_rq_map_sg+0x430/0x4d0
[ 137.211393] [] ? scsi_init_cmd_errh+0x90/0x90
[ 137.211398] [] scsi_init_sgtable+0x44/0x80
[ 137.211402]
On Wed, Nov 25 2015 at 3:23pm -0500,
Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25 2015 at 2:24pm -0500,
> Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> > On 11/25/2015 12:10 PM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> > >The problem is that NOMERGE does too much, as it inhibits _any_ merging.
> >
> > Right, that is the point of the flag
On 11/25/2015 12:10 PM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 11/25/2015 06:56 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 11/25/2015 02:04 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 11/20/2015 04:28 PM, Ewan Milne wrote:
On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 15:55 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
Can't we have a joint effort here?
I've been spending a _
On 11/25/2015 02:04 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 11/20/2015 04:28 PM, Ewan Milne wrote:
On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 15:55 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
Can't we have a joint effort here?
I've been spending a _LOT_ of time trying to debug things here, but
none of the ideas I've come up with have been
On Wed, Nov 25 2015 at 2:24pm -0500,
Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 11/25/2015 12:10 PM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> >On 11/25/2015 06:56 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>On 11/25/2015 02:04 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> >>>On 11/20/2015 04:28 PM, Ewan Milne wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 15:55 +0100, Hannes R
On 11/25/2015 06:56 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 11/25/2015 02:04 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 11/20/2015 04:28 PM, Ewan Milne wrote:
On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 15:55 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
Can't we have a joint effort here?
I've been spending a _LOT_ of time trying to debug things here, but
no
On 11/25/2015 07:01 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25 2015 at 4:04am -0500,
Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 11/20/2015 04:28 PM, Ewan Milne wrote:
On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 15:55 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
Can't we have a joint effort here?
I've been spending a _LOT_ of time trying to debug t
On Wed, Nov 25 2015 at 4:04am -0500,
Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 11/20/2015 04:28 PM, Ewan Milne wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 15:55 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> >> Can't we have a joint effort here?
> >> I've been spending a _LOT_ of time trying to debug things here, but
> >> none of the
On 11/20/2015 04:28 PM, Ewan Milne wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 15:55 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> Can't we have a joint effort here?
>> I've been spending a _LOT_ of time trying to debug things here, but
>> none of the ideas I've come up with have been able to fix anything.
>
> Yes. I'm no
On 11/23/2015 10:21 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:46:20 +0800
Ming Lei wrote:
Hi Mark,
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Mark Salter wrote:
On Mon, 2015-11-23 at 08:36 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Mark Salter wrote:
On Sun, 2015-11-22 at 00:56 +0800
On Mon, 2015-11-23 at 23:27 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Laurent Dufour
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Reverting above commit on top if 4.4-rc1 seems to fix the problem for me.
> >
> > That's what I mentioned earlier ;)
> >
> > Now Ming send an additional patch with seems to
On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:46:20 +0800
Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Mark Salter wrote:
> > On Mon, 2015-11-23 at 08:36 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> >> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Mark Salter wrote:
> >> > On Sun, 2015-11-22 at 00:56 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> >> >
On 23/11/2015:02:57:19 PM, Laurent Dufour wrote:
> On 23/11/2015 00:20, Mark Salter wrote:
> > On Sun, 2015-11-22 at 00:56 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> >> On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:30:14 +0100
> >> Laurent Dufour wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 20/11/2015 13:10, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-11-19 at
On 23/11/2015 16:27, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Laurent Dufour
> wrote:
>>>
>>> Reverting above commit on top if 4.4-rc1 seems to fix the problem for me.
>>
>> That's what I mentioned earlier ;)
>>
>> Now Ming send an additional patch with seems to fix the bug introduced
>
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Laurent Dufour
wrote:
>>
>> Reverting above commit on top if 4.4-rc1 seems to fix the problem for me.
>
> That's what I mentioned earlier ;)
>
> Now Ming send an additional patch with seems to fix the bug introduced
> through the commit bdced438acd8. When testing
On 23/11/2015 16:13, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> On 23/11/2015:02:57:19 PM, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>> On 23/11/2015 00:20, Mark Salter wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2015-11-22 at 00:56 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:30:14 +0100
Laurent Dufour wrote:
> On 20/11/2015 13:10, Michael
On 23/11/2015 00:20, Mark Salter wrote:
> On Sun, 2015-11-22 at 00:56 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:30:14 +0100
>> Laurent Dufour wrote:
>>
>>> On 20/11/2015 13:10, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 00:23 -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> It's pretty mu
On 11/20/2015 04:28 PM, Ewan Milne wrote:
On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 15:55 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
Can't we have a joint effort here?
I've been spending a _LOT_ of time trying to debug things here, but
none of the ideas I've come up with have been able to fix anything.
Yes. I'm not the one p
Hi Mark,
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Mark Salter wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-11-23 at 08:36 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Mark Salter wrote:
>> > On Sun, 2015-11-22 at 00:56 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> > > On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:30:14 +0100
>> > > Laurent Dufour wrote:
On Mon, 2015-11-23 at 08:36 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Mark Salter wrote:
> > On Sun, 2015-11-22 at 00:56 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:30:14 +0100
> > > Laurent Dufour wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 20/11/2015 13:10, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > >
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Mark Salter wrote:
> On Sun, 2015-11-22 at 00:56 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:30:14 +0100
>> Laurent Dufour wrote:
>>
>> > On 20/11/2015 13:10, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> > > On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 00:23 -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> > >
>>
On Sun, 2015-11-22 at 00:56 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:30:14 +0100
> Laurent Dufour wrote:
>
> > On 20/11/2015 13:10, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 00:23 -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > >
> > > > It's pretty much guaranteed a block layer bug, most l
On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:30:14 +0100
Laurent Dufour wrote:
> On 20/11/2015 13:10, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 00:23 -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> >> It's pretty much guaranteed a block layer bug, most likely in the
> >> merge bios to request infrastucture where we don
On 20/11/2015 13:10, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 00:23 -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
>> It's pretty much guaranteed a block layer bug, most likely in the
>> merge bios to request infrastucture where we don't obey the merging
>> limits properly.
>>
>> Does either of you have
On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 15:55 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> Can't we have a joint effort here?
> I've been spending a _LOT_ of time trying to debug things here, but
> none of the ideas I've come up with have been able to fix anything.
Yes. I'm not the one primarily looking at it, and we don't hav
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 16:35 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 11/19/2015 09:23 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > It's pretty much guaranteed a block layer bug, most likely in the
> > merge bios to request infrastucture where we don't obey the merging
> > limits properly.
> >
> > Does either of you
On 11/20/2015 03:38 PM, Ewan Milne wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 16:35 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> On 11/19/2015 09:23 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> It's pretty much guaranteed a block layer bug, most likely in the
>>> merge bios to request infrastucture where we don't obey the merging
>>>
On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 13:56 +0100, Laurent Dufour wrote:
> On 20/11/2015 13:10, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 00:23 -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> > > It's pretty much guaranteed a block layer bug, most likely in the
> > > merge bios to request infrastucture where we don
On 20/11/2015 13:10, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 00:23 -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
>> It's pretty much guaranteed a block layer bug, most likely in the
>> merge bios to request infrastucture where we don't obey the merging
>> limits properly.
>>
>> Does either of you have
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 00:23 -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> It's pretty much guaranteed a block layer bug, most likely in the
> merge bios to request infrastucture where we don't obey the merging
> limits properly.
>
> Does either of you have a known good and first known bad kernel?
Not me, I'
On 11/19/2015 09:23 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> It's pretty much guaranteed a block layer bug, most likely in the
> merge bios to request infrastucture where we don't obey the merging
> limits properly.
>
> Does either of you have a known good and first known bad kernel?
Well, I have been figh
It's pretty much guaranteed a block layer bug, most likely in the
merge bios to request infrastucture where we don't obey the merging
limits properly.
Does either of you have a known good and first known bad kernel?
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc
On Wed, 2015-11-18 at 09:03 -0500, Mark Salter wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-11-18 at 20:18 +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I'm intermittently seeing the following oops on at least one powerpc box.
> >
> > The BUG_ON() is from:
> >
> > static int scsi_init_sgtable(struct request *re
[6.972093] Exception stack(0xfe03dc143de0 to 0xfe03dc143f00)
>
> cheers
>
>
> systemd[1]: Starting Uncomplicated firewall...
> Starting Uncomplicated firewall...
> [ cut here ]
> kernel BUG at drivers/scsi/sc
On 18/11/2015 12:10, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-11-18 at 12:06 +0100, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>> On 18/11/2015 10:18, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> I'm intermittently seeing the following oops on at least one powerpc box.
>>>
>>> The BUG_ON() is from:
>>>
>>> static int sc
On Wed, 2015-11-18 at 12:06 +0100, Laurent Dufour wrote:
> On 18/11/2015 10:18, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I'm intermittently seeing the following oops on at least one powerpc box.
> >
> > The BUG_ON() is from:
> >
> > static int scsi_init_sgtable(struct request *req, struct s
Anyone seen it before or have any ideas?
Hi Michael,
I'm facing the same panic on my bare metal system.
Sounds to be raised by the latest update to 4.4-rc1
Laurent.
> cheers
>
>
> systemd[1]: Starting Uncomplicated firewall...
> Starting Uncomplicated firewall...
>
]----
kernel BUG at drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c:1096!
Oops: Exception in kernel mode, sig: 5 [#1]
SMP NR_CPUS=2048 NUMA PowerNV
Modules linked in:
CPU: 132 PID: 2699 Comm: kworker/132:1H Not tainted
4.4.0-rc1-54939-ge22a248-dirty #77
Workqueue: kblockd cfq_kick_queue
task: c00fef147400 t
40 matches
Mail list logo
