Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 19 Jun 2012 17:55:20 +0100 | From | Ken Moffat <> | Subject | Re: nfs3 problem with -rc{2,3} : blame |
| |
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 04:23:23PM +0000, Myklebust, Trond wrote: > On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 12:20 -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > > > However you are saying that the problem is there when you compile a > > kernel with this commit as the head, and it goes away when you compile a > > kernel with commit 3e9e0ca3f19e911ce13c2e6c9858fcb41a37496c as the head? > > Provided I apply 4f97615d as well, so that it compiles, yes.
> > I'm confused as to how a bug in that patch could depend on > > CONFIG_NFS_V4, but I'll see what I can find.
Thanks > > By the way, I thought your test-case was doing firefox downloads. Do > those really use O_DIRECT? > I originally saw the problem doing that, but it was on the second download. Or perhaps third or fourth - I tend not to remember successful downloads when I've got a lot of packages to check for new versions. Using my backup script seemed a more reliable way to trigger a problem (but, only if there is something substantial to back up, such as a new vmlinuz).
Thinking about this, it is almost certain that between the first download and the one that failed (several hours later) my backup script did run, from fcron, so I now think the rsync problem is what leads to issues when other programs later try to update the same nfs directory.
ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |