On Nov 16, 2007 3:15 PM, Kamalesh Babulal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> The kernel enters the xmon state while running the file system
> stress on nfs v4 mounted partition.
[snip]
> 0:mon> t
> [c000dbd4fb50] c0069768 .__wake_up+0x54/0x88
> [c000dbd4fc00] d086b8
On Nov 17, 2007 7:58 PM, Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2007-11-17 at 18:53 +0100, Torsten Kaiser wrote:
> > On Nov 16, 2007 3:15 PM, Kamalesh Babulal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi Andrew,
> > >
> > > The kernel
On Nov 17, 2007 7:19 PM, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 19:09:46 +0100 Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > * Torsten Kaiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Sadly lockdep does not work fo
On Nov 17, 2007 8:33 PM, Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > That's slub. It appears that list_lock is being taken from process context
> > in one place and from softirq in another.
>
> I kicked out some weird interrupt disable code in mm
On Nov 18, 2007 12:05 AM, Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2007 at 08:40:22PM +0100, Torsten Kaiser wrote:
>
> > Lockdep triggers immedetly before the freeze, but the result is still
> > not helpful:
> >
> > [ 221.565011]
On Nov 18, 2007 12:05 AM, Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been staring at this NFS code for a while an can't make any sense
> out of it. It seems to correctly initialize the waitqueue. So this would
> indicate corruption of some sort.
No, it does not "correctly" initialize the wai
On Nov 18, 2007 8:18 PM, Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-11-18 at 19:44 +0100, Torsten Kaiser wrote:
> > NFSv2/3 and NFSv4 share the same dentry_iput and so share the same
> > unlink and sillyrename logic.
> > But they do not share nfs_init_ser
On Nov 19, 2007 10:00 AM, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 08:15:48 +0100 "Torsten Kaiser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Nov 18, 2007 8:18 PM, Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I had already fixed that o