From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] NFS regression in 2.6.26?, "task blocked for more than 120 seconds" Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 12:16:52 +0000 Message-ID: <1228565812.10856.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20081017123207.GA14979@rabbit.intern.cm-ag> <1224484046.23068.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1225539927.2221.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1225546878.4390.3.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-g/WvySxpzsa0UFMPoYiZ" Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Max Kellermann , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gcosta@redhat.com, Grant Coady , "J. Bruce Fields" , Tom Tucker To: Trond Myklebust Return-path: Received: from mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.47]:9622 "EHLO mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757699AbYLFMRF (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Dec 2008 07:17:05 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1228169383.20370.3.camel-bi+AKbBUZKY6gyzm1THtWbp2dZbC/Bob@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --=-g/WvySxpzsa0UFMPoYiZ Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 have > since been removed the backports.org so I've reproduce with 2.6.26 and > now I'll add the patches. 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. With the patched server the client ran OK for 2.5 days then mysteriously 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. Ian. --=20 Ian Campbell It's later than you think. --=-g/WvySxpzsa0UFMPoYiZ 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) iEYEABECAAYFAkk6bTQACgkQM0+0qS9rzVn/uACeOPui26Cv/4sOESNeEO0VpwC9 W8EAoJHcgzLN5JbeqhzDeXpUweEEMGEi =76BA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-g/WvySxpzsa0UFMPoYiZ--