On 10/04/2010 09:51 PM, Chris Frey wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 06:37:36PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Hello, sorry about chiming in later. I was off last week.
>
> No problem, I'm eager to test patches to fix this.
>
>> I think we're on the right track.
Hello, sorry about chiming in later. I was off last week.
On 09/29/2010 08:34 AM, Chris Frey wrote:
> 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
may be in flight, so it's
difficult to tell where blk_rq_pos(req) currently is.
Add ubd->rq_pos to keep track of the issue position and use it to
correctly restart io_req issue.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo
Reported-by: Richard Weinberger
Tested-by: Richard Weinberger
Tested-by: Chris Fre
Hello,
On 10/14/2010 04:20 PM, richard -rw- weinberger wrote:
> It does not work for me.
> But the error is a different one. :-)
> Without your patch I've never got this kernel trace.
>
> [ 59.85] kworker/0:1: page allocation failure. order:0, mode:0x20
Hmm... you're seeing out of memory c
Hello,
Can you please try this one then? It seems to work here but I can't
reproduce the original problem reliably so I'm not really sure.
Thanks.
diff --git a/arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c b/arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c
index 1bcd208..9734994 100644
--- a/arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c
+++ b/arch/um/dr
