From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] NFS regression in 2.6.26?, "task blocked for more than 120 seconds" Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 18:39:35 +0000 Message-ID: <1229452775.3721.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1227596962.16868.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1227619696.7057.19.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <1227620339.9425.99.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <1227621434.7057.33.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <1227621877.9425.102.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <1227737539.31008.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1228090631.7112.11.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <1228169383.20370.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1228565812.10856.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1229279045.3721.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20081216175503.GG16388@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-ZFpDXblzXlZwR0uz0c45" Cc: Trond Myklebust , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Max Kellermann , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gcosta@redhat.com, Grant Coady , Tom Tucker To: "J. Bruce Fields" Return-path: Received: from mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.47]:16919 "EHLO mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751000AbYLPSju (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Dec 2008 13:39:50 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20081216175503.GG16388@fieldses.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --=-ZFpDXblzXlZwR0uz0c45 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2008-12-16 at 12:55 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 06:24:05PM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Sat, 2008-12-06 at 12:16 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 22:09 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 19:17 -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:=20 > > > > > Can you see if the following 3 patches help? They're against 2.6.= 28-rc6, > > > > > but afaics the problems are pretty much the same on 2.6.26. > > > >=20 > > > > Thanks. > > > >=20 > > > > The server was actually running 2.6.25.7 but the matching sources h= ave > > > > since been removed the backports.org so I've reproduce with 2.6.26 = and > > > > now I'll add the patches. > > >=20 > > > Just a small progress report. Anecdotally I thought that unpatched > > > 2.6.26.7 was worse than 2.6.25.7, mostly because it hung twice in the= ~1 > > > day I was running it where previously it was less frequent than once = per > > > day. > > >=20 > > > With the patched server the client ran OK for 2.5 days then mysteriou= sly > > > hung, the logs show none of the normal symptoms and my wife reset it > > > before I got home so I've no real clue what happened but I'm inclined= to > > > think it was unrelated for now. I'll get back to you in a week or so = if > > > the problem hasn't reoccurred. > >=20 > > $ uptime=20 > > 18:15:29 up 9 days, 22 min, 1 user, load average: 0.74, 0.64, 0.46 > >=20 > > This is on the problematic client, so it looks like the server side fix > > has sorted it. Thanks very much Trond. >=20 > Thanks for the testing! So this was with the following three patches > applied on the server on top of 2.6.26? >=20 > [PATCH 1/3] SUNRPC: Ensure the server closes sockets in a timely fashion > [PATCH 2/3] SUNRPC: We only need to call svc_delete_xprt() once... > [PATCH 3/3] SUNRPC: svc_xprt_enqueue should not refuse to enqueue 'XPT_D= EAD' transports That's right, it was actually 2.6.26.7 FWIW. > I'll try to take a look at these before I leave for the holidays, > assuming the versions Trond posted on Nov. 30 are the latest. Thanks. Ian. --=20 Ian Campbell The light of a hundred stars does not equal the light of the moon. --=-ZFpDXblzXlZwR0uz0c45 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAklH9ecACgkQM0+0qS9rzVnM/wCfb3ArQ2syhn5OhcsPOVBlzBrW dMkAnilwZVMzML490u+fQlhd/DWVeQN9 =ySXr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-ZFpDXblzXlZwR0uz0c45--