Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264121AbTE0UaR (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 May 2003 16:30:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264122AbTE0UaR (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 May 2003 16:30:17 -0400 Received: from adsl-67-122-203-155.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net ([67.122.203.155]:13771 "EHLO ext.storadinc.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264121AbTE0UaK (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 May 2003 16:30:10 -0400 Message-ID: <3ED3CDB8.3000500@storadinc.com> Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 13:42:32 -0700 From: manish User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020408 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marc-Christian Petersen CC: Andrea Arcangeli , Marcelo Tosatti , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger , Christian Klose , William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: 2.4.20: Proccess stuck in __lock_page ... References: <3ED2DE86.2070406@storadinc.com> <3ED3BDCE.4010200@storadinc.com> <20030527202047.GM3767@dualathlon.random> <200305272225.27720.m.c.p@wolk-project.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1505 Lines: 51 Marc-Christian Petersen wrote: >On Tuesday 27 May 2003 22:20, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > >Hi Andrea, > > >>>1. Stock 2.4.20 >>>2. 2.4.20 with the io_request_lock removed. >>>The tests on the first one are still going. The tests on the second one >>>showed processes getting stuck for long times (> 5 minutes) and not >>>paused ... >>> >>sorry if it's a dumb question but what is the "io_request_lock removed" >>thing? Hope you didn't delete any io_request_lock, if you did you can >>get worse things than crashes (i.e. mm/fs corruption). the pausing bug >>was a genuine race (quite innocent, if you could trigger a disk unplug >>you could recover from it) >> >>Andrea >> >funny. I asked him the same ;) > >see his response: > >----------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>what is this io_request_lock patch you are talking about? >> >>ciao, Marc >> >We made some changes to the 2.4.20 kernel to remove the io_request_lock >and replace with queue_lock and host_lock. >----------------------------------------------------------------------- > >ciao, Marc > We made a change in the 2.4.20 kernel to remove the io_request_lock and replace with the host_lock and the queue_lock. Probably, not a right thing to do Thanks Manish - 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/