Re: [uml-user] [PATCH 1/1] um: ubd: Fix data corruption

2010-10-01 Thread Chris Frey
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:13:10AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am Mittwoch 29 September 2010, 00:00:00 schrieb Andrew Morton: > > This is a workaround, I think? Do we know what the actual bug is? > > From the comment it appears to be a regression? > > Yes, it is a workaround. > For more de

Re: [uml-user] [PATCH 1/1] um: ubd: Fix data corruption

2010-10-01 Thread Chris Frey
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 08:10:06AM +0900, Jens Axboe wrote: > It looks like that if we need to restart the requeue, then > we use the initial position and not the current index. Does > this help? > > diff --git a/arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c b/arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c > index 1bcd208..81ee063 1006

Re: [uml-user] [PATCH 1/1] um: ubd: Fix data corruption

2010-10-01 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 23:47:36 +0200 Richard Weinberger wrote: > Under high load the file system gets corrupted. > This patch fixes the issue. > > Many thanks to Janjaap Bos ! > > LKML-Reference: gmail ! com> > Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger > --- > arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c |7 +--

Re: [uml-user] [PATCH 1/1] um: ubd: Fix data corruption

2010-10-01 Thread Jens Axboe
On 2010-09-29 07:52, Chris Frey wrote: > On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:13:10AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> Am Mittwoch 29 September 2010, 00:00:00 schrieb Andrew Morton: >>> This is a workaround, I think? Do we know what the actual bug is? >>> From the comment it appears to be a regression? >

Re: [uml-user] [PATCH 1/1] um: ubd: Fix data corruption

2010-10-01 Thread Janjaap Bos
On Wed, 2010-09-29 at 08:10 +0900, Jens Axboe wrote: > It looks like that if we need to restart the requeue, then > we use the initial position and not the current index. Does > this help? > > diff --git a/arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c b/arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c > index 1bcd208..81ee063 100644 > -

Re: [uml-user] [PATCH 1/1] um: ubd: Fix data corruption

2010-10-01 Thread Chris Frey
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:13:10AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am Mittwoch 29 September 2010, 00:00:00 schrieb Andrew Morton: > > This is a workaround, I think? Do we know what the actual bug is? > > From the comment it appears to be a regression? > > Yes, it is a workaround. > For more de

Re: [uml-user] [PATCH 1/1] um: ubd: Fix data corruption

2010-10-01 Thread Jens Axboe
On 2010-09-29 10:29, Chris Frey wrote: > On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 08:10:06AM +0900, Jens Axboe wrote: >> It looks like that if we need to restart the requeue, then >> we use the initial position and not the current index. Does >> this help? >> >> diff --git a/arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c b/arch/um/dri

Re: [uml-user] [PATCH 1/1] um: ubd: Fix data corruption

2010-10-01 Thread Chris Frey
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 02:21:07PM +0900, Jens Axboe wrote: > This seems to imply that the original commit pin pointed is not > the only issue we have in that code atm. > > I think we need to find the real fix here, just disabling merging > is not a fix (it's just a nasty work-around for the real

[uml-user] [PATCH 1/1] um: ubd: Fix data corruption

2010-10-01 Thread Richard Weinberger
Under high load the file system gets corrupted. This patch fixes the issue. Many thanks to Janjaap Bos ! LKML-Reference: Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger --- arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c |7 +-- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c b/