From: Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: resize2fs stuck in ext4_group_extend with 100% CPU Utilization With Small Volumes Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:41:16 -0500 Message-ID: <5601E71C.4080705@redhat.com> References: <06724CF51D6BC94E9BEE7A8A8CB82A6740FE22BCBA@MX01A.corp.emc.com> <20150922202058.GB3318@thunk.org> <06724CF51D6BC94E9BEE7A8A8CB82A6740FE22BCDF@MX01A.corp.emc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" To: "Pocas, Jamie" , "Theodore Ts'o" Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44236 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758766AbbIVXlQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 19:41:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: <06724CF51D6BC94E9BEE7A8A8CB82A6740FE22BCDF@MX01A.corp.emc.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 9/22/15 4:26 PM, Pocas, Jamie wrote: > Hi Theodore, > > I am not sure if you had a chance to see my reply to Eric yet. I can > see you are using the same general approach that Eric was using. The > key difference from what I am doing again seems to be that I am > resizing the underlying disk *while the filesystem is mounted*. Do you see the same problem if you resize a physical disk, not just with loopback? Sounds like it... In theory it should be reproducible w/ lvm too, then, I think, unless there's some issue specific to your block device similar to what's happening on the loop device. > Instead you both are using truncate to grow the disk while the > filesystem is not currently mounted, and then mounting it. Always worth communicating a testcase in the first email, if you have one, so we don't have to guess. ;) thanks, -Eric