lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jun]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: frequent softlockups with 3.10rc6.
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 12:05:31PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 03:23:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > So with that patch, those two boxes have now been fuzzing away for
> > > over 24hrs without seeing that specific sync related bug.
> >
> > Ok, so at least that confirms that yes, the problem is the excessive
> > contention on inode_sb_list_lock.
> >
> > Ugh. There's no way we can do that patch by DaveC for 3.10. Not only
> > is it scary, Andi pointed out that it's actively buggy and will miss
> > inodes that need writeback due to moving things to private lists.
>
> Right - it was just a quick hack for proof of concept... :)
>
> > So I suspect we'll have to do 3.10 with this starvation issue in
> > place, and mark for stable backporting whatever eventual fix we find.
>
> I can reproduce the contention problem on both 3.8 and 3.9 kernels,
> so this isn't a recent regression, and as such it's likely I'll be
> able to reproduce it on any kernel since the global inode_lock
> breakup was done back in 2.6.38.

Just as a data point - I just found a machine running a 3.4 kernel
and I can reproduce the inode_sb_list_lock contention problem on it,
too. It's definitely not a new problem...

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-06-30 04:41    [W:0.111 / U:0.144 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site