Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261234AbUIIMLI (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2004 08:11:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261474AbUIIMLI (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2004 08:11:08 -0400 Received: from unthought.net ([212.97.129.88]:36299 "EHLO unthought.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261234AbUIIMLC (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2004 08:11:02 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 14:11:00 +0200 From: Jakob Oestergaard To: Nathan Scott Cc: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Major XFS problems... Message-ID: <20040909121100.GN390@unthought.net> Mail-Followup-To: Jakob Oestergaard , Nathan Scott , linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20040908123524.GZ390@unthought.net> <20040909074046.A3958243@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> <20040908232210.GL390@unthought.net> <20040909094255.F3951028@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040909094255.F3951028@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1399 Lines: 35 On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 09:42:55AM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote: > Hi Jakob, > ... > OK, so could you add the details on how you're managing to hit it > into that bug?... when you say "trivially" - does that mean you > have a recipe that is guaranteed to quickly hit it? A reproducible > test case would be extremely useful in tracking this down. On the two systems where I've seen this, the recipe is to set up an SMP+NFS+XFS server, and have a number of clients mount the exported filesystem, then perform reads and writes... The two servers are used very differently - one is holding a small number of source trees that are compiled/linked on a small cluster. The other is holding a very large number of user home directories, where the primary use is web serving (web servers running on the NFS clients). A google for 'debug.c:106' turns out some 120 results - it seems that no special magic is needed, other than a few boxes to set up the test scenario. On the 29th of februrary, akp@cohaesio.com submitted (as comment #23 to bug #309) a description of a test setup along with a shell script that was used to trigger this problem. -- / jakob - 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/