Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935709AbYBHRSt (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 12:18:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S934436AbYBHRFw (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 12:05:52 -0500 Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com ([148.87.113.118]:24274 "EHLO rgminet01.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934171AbYBHRFr (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 12:05:47 -0500 Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 09:04:07 -0800 From: Randy Dunlap To: Vivek Goyal Cc: Tomasz Chmielewski , LKML , Kexec Mailing List , Horms Subject: Re: why kexec insists on syncing with recent kernels? Message-Id: <20080208090407.4ab240f1.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <20080208160408.GB18782@redhat.com> References: <47AB120A.1000600@wpkg.org> <20080207163752.GD11969@redhat.com> <47AB38E2.9050509@wpkg.org> <20080208160408.GB18782@redhat.com> Organization: Oracle Linux Eng. X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.7 (GTK+ 2.8.10; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3557 Lines: 101 On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 11:04:08 -0500 Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 05:59:14PM +0100, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote: > > Vivek Goyal schrieb: > >> On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 03:13:30PM +0100, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote: > >>> According to kernel/kexec.c: > >>> > >>> * kexec does not sync, or unmount filesystems so if you need > >>> * that to happen you need to do that yourself. > >>> > >>> > >> > >> In latest kexec code I do see it syncing. But it does not unmount the > >> filesystems. So this comment looks like partially wrong. > >> > >>> I saw this was true with 2.6.18 kernel (i.e., it didn't sync), but kexec > >>> syncs with recent kernels (I checked 2.6.23.14 and 2.6.24): > >>> > >>> # kexec -e > >>> md: stopping all md devices > >>> sd 2:0:0:0: [sdb] Synchronizing SCSI cache > >> > >> Which kexec-tools you are using? > > > > # kexec -v > > kexec 1.101 released 15 February 2005 > > > > > >> syncing is initiated by user space so changing kernel will not have > >> any effect (as long as user space is same). I think just that message > >> are spitted by kernel, so probably 2.6.18 did not spit any message and > >> 2.6.24 does. > > > > Yes and no. > > I just booted 2.6.24 on a diskless system (Mandriva) I normally use with > > 2.6.18 kernel, did kexec -e... And it executed the kernel immediately, > > without any syncing. > > On Debian, with the same 2.6.24 kernel, it does sync. > > > > So what user space part does the syncing (and how to prevent it)? > > Syncing is initiated by kexec-tools. Following is the code in > kexec/kexec.c in kexec-tools-testing.tar.gz > > > if ((result == 0) && do_sync) { > sync(); > > I think this problem has nothing to do with syncing. There seems to be > some dependency on not shutting down network here. You might want to > debug, exactly where does it get stuck. > > - Specify earlyprintk= parameter for second kernel and see if control > is reaching to second kernel. > > - Otherwise specify --console-serial parameter on "kexec -l" commandline > and it should display a message "I am in purgatory" on serial console. > This will just mean that control has reached at least till purgatory. > > Right now there does not seem to be any option to prevent syncing and > I don't know why would one like to have one. > > > (...) > > > > > >>> The way kexec works now makes rebooting unreliable again: > >>> - network interfaces are brought down, > >>> - kernel tries to sync - it never will, as we're booted off network, > >>> which is down > >>> > >> > >> Kexec has got an option -x --no-ifdown, which will not bring the network > >> down. Try that. "kexec- -e -x" > > > > It does seem to help, thanks. > > > > Why it has to be the last option specified? > > > > I have no idea. This might be an stale comment. Try putting -x before -e. > > > I tried -f option before (don't call shutdown), but it didn't help. > > > > Even if you did -f, it must have shutdown the network. I think somehow > in latest kernels there is some dependency on network and that's why > not shutting down network in this case is helping you. I'm seeing NFS mounts take forever to unmount (at shutdown/reboot). (forever => 1 hour ... or never completes) Is this similar to the problem that the OP is asking about? --- ~Randy -- 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/