Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 18:13:12 +1000
From: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>
To: Balbir Singh <balbir@in.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH]  Per-superblock unused dentry LRU lists V2
Message-ID: <20060525081312.GE8069029@melbourne.sgi.com>
References: <20060524110001.GU1331387@melbourne.sgi.com> <20060525040604.GB25185@in.ibm.com> <20060525061553.GC8069029@melbourne.sgi.com> <20060525063350.GD8069029@melbourne.sgi.com> <20060525065219.GD25185@in.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20060525065219.GD25185@in.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1978
Lines: 49

On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 12:22:20PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 04:33:50PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 04:15:53PM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > > 
> > > FWIW, this create/unlink load has been triggering reliable "Busy
> > > inodes after unmount" errors that I've slowly been tracking down.
> > > After I fixed the last problem in XFS late last week, I've
> > > been getting a failure that i think is the unmount/prune_dcache
> > > races that you and Neil have recently fixed.
> > 
> > I just had all 8 filesystems come up with:
> > 
> > May 25 15:55:18 budgie kernel: XFS unmount got error 16
> > May 25 15:55:18 budgie kernel: xfs_fs_put_super: vfsp/0xe00000b006339280 left dangling!
> > May 25 15:55:18 budgie kernel: VFS: Busy inodes after unmount of dm-9. Self-destruct in 5 seconds.  Have a nice day...

.....

> > On the second test iteration. On 2.6.16, it takes about 10 iterations to get one
> > filesystem to do this. I'll need to look into this one further. I'm going to
> > reboot the machine and run some dbench tests (which typically don't trigger
> > this problem) and then come back to this one with added debugging....
> 
> Is this with version 2 of your patch?

That's with version 2 on -rc4-mm3.

> Could you also try the -mm tree
> and see if the problem goes away. We have a set of patches to address
> exactly this problem. 

Well, the patches overlap and I thought that I had taken into account
the fixes that were applied to the -mm tree.

I'm rerunning on 2.6.16 with the s_umount locking fix so I know that it's
not something else in -mm that is being tripped over....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
R&D Software Enginner
SGI Australian Software Group
-
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/