Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933153AbXEPX6D (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 May 2007 19:58:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756415AbXEPX5z (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 May 2007 19:57:55 -0400 Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:36644 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755714AbXEPX5y (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 May 2007 19:57:54 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 09:57:31 +1000 From: David Chinner To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: David Chinner , Michal Piotrowski , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , LKML , xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: [2/3] 2.6.22-rc1: known regressions v2 - XFS Message-ID: <20070516235731.GR85884050@sgi.com> References: <464B6743.9000607@googlemail.com> <464B6A2B.9020703@googlemail.com> <20070516233419.GP85884050@sgi.com> <464B9664.2040200@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <464B9664.2040200@goop.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2263 Lines: 65 On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 04:40:20PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > David Chinner wrote: > > Jeremy has tentatively indicated that the patch has fixed the problem. > > Have you seen any more problems since applying the patch, Jeremy? > > > > No, it continues to seem sound with casual use; I would have expected to > see the problem reoccur by now. I'd like to rerun the full set of tests > I did before to be sure, but so far so good. No other apparent > regressions either. Good to here. I think the problem is fixed, then. > Also, the match between the observed symptoms and the bugfix is very > good, which adds confidence (ie, no element of "it works now but we > don't know why"). I guess the only remaining concern is whether there > are any other paths which fail to dirty the inode. There aren't any that I can see - if more come up we'll deal with them then. > Did you manage to repro the problem? xfs_io is my friend ;) Without patch: # touch /mnt/scratch/fred # xfs_io -c "pwrite 0 5" -c "s" -c "pwrite 5 5" /mnt/scratch/fred wrote 5/5 bytes at offset 0 5.000000 bytes, 1 ops; 0.0000 sec (78.755 KiB/sec and 16129.0323 ops/sec) wrote 5/5 bytes at offset 5 5.000000 bytes, 1 ops; 0.0000 sec (542.535 KiB/sec and 111111.1111 ops/sec) # umount /mnt/scratch; mount /mnt/scratch; ls -l /mnt/scratch/fred -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5 May 17 10:04 fred # So the second 5 byte write didn't change the file size. With patch: # touch /mnt/scratch/fred # xfs_io -c "pwrite 0 5" -c "s" -c "pwrite 5 5" /mnt/scratch/fred wrote 5/5 bytes at offset 0 5.000000 bytes, 1 ops; 0.0000 sec (76 KiB/sec and 15625.0000 ops/sec) wrote 5/5 bytes at offset 5 5.000000 bytes, 1 ops; 0.0000 sec (610 KiB/sec and 125000.0000 ops/sec) # umount /mnt/scratch; mount /mnt/scratch; ls -l /mnt/scratch/fred -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10 May 17 09:53 fred # So yes, I've reproduced it and confirmed the patch fixes the problem. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer 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/