Hi
does anyone know what these mean ?
under
2.4.19-pre8
invalidate: busy buffer
in the dmesg output
got a bunch of these about 15 all together all of a sudden
thanks
James
--------------------------
Mobile: +44 07779080838
http://www.stev.org
11:00pm up 6 days, 10:21, 7 users, load average: 0.04, 0.15, 0.12
On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 23:14:48 +0100
"James Stevenson" <[email protected]> wrote:
Something tried to wipe out all of the caches for some device, but
something else was using it at the time. For example, if you try to run
parted on something mounted (and bypass/confuse its mountedness check)
you'll see this. Were you doing anything like that?
> Hi
>
> does anyone know what these mean ?
>
> under
>
> 2.4.19-pre8
>
> invalidate: busy buffer
>
> in the dmesg output
> got a bunch of these about 15 all together all of a sudden
>
>
> thanks
> James
>
> --------------------------
> Mobile: +44 07779080838
> http://www.stev.org
> 11:00pm up 6 days, 10:21, 7 users, load average: 0.04, 0.15, 0.12
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
On Tue, 2002-06-18 at 00:21, Andrew Rodland wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 23:14:48 +0100
> "James Stevenson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Something tried to wipe out all of the caches for some device, but
> something else was using it at the time. For example, if you try to run
> parted on something mounted (and bypass/confuse its mountedness check)
> you'll see this. Were you doing anything like that?
or run for example hdparm -tT device to do a (imho pretty useless)
"benchmark" of io throughput.
--
Andr? Tomt
[email protected]
On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 23:27:35 +0100
"James Stevenson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Something tried to wipe out all of the caches for some device, but
> > something else was using it at the time. For example, if you try to
> > run parted on something mounted (and bypass/confuse its mountedness
> > check) you'll see this. Were you doing anything like that?
>
> well i was running a badblocks over a 40GB ide disk i tend to check
> them every few months.
> apart from that everything else was running as non-root.
> but yes some things would have been using the disk there was a copy
> going on at the same time
> around 400MB
>
badblocks is another one of those apps that will try to flush out as
much cache as it can; it's not much use trying the sectors repeatedly if
it's just going to get cached versions :)
>
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > does anyone know what these mean ?
> > >
> > > under
> > >
> > > 2.4.19-pre8
> > >
> > > invalidate: busy buffer
> > >
> > > in the dmesg output
> > > got a bunch of these about 15 all together all of a sudden
>
>
>
On 18 Jun 2002 00:46:14 +0200
Andre Tomt <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-06-18 at 00:21, Andrew Rodland wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 23:14:48 +0100
> > "James Stevenson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Something tried to wipe out all of the caches for some device, but
> > something else was using it at the time. For example, if you try to
> > run parted on something mounted (and bypass/confuse its mountedness
> > check) you'll see this. Were you doing anything like that?
>
> or run for example hdparm -tT device to do a (imho pretty useless)
> "benchmark" of io throughput.
>
> --
> Andr? Tomt
> [email protected]
>
the first half of hdparm -Tt is useful as a benchmark of how quick other
parts of the kernel are, though... changing the optimization level, or
the difference between vanilla and rmap, non-preempt and preempt, etc,
affects this a good bit. :)