Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.36 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.36;
Feedback-ID: id4a34324:Fastmail
Date:   Wed, 25 Oct 2023 19:48:29 -0700
From:   Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc:     Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>,
        Shreeya Patel <shreeya.patel@collabora.com>,
        linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
        Ricardo =?utf-8?Q?Ca=C3=B1uelo?= <ricardo.canuelo@collabora.com>,
        gustavo.padovan@collabora.com, zsm@google.com, garrick@google.com,
        Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@lists.linux.dev>,
        io-uring@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: task hung in ext4_fallocate #2
Message-ID: <20231026024829.vcnlmdmwi5hjjquz@awork3.anarazel.de>
References: <20231018004335.GA593012@mit.edu>
 <20231018025009.ulkykpefwdgpfvzf@awork3.anarazel.de>
 <ZTcZ9+n+jX6UDrgd@dread.disaster.area>
 <74921cba-6237-4303-bb4c-baa22aaf497b@kernel.dk>
 <ab4f311b-9700-4d3d-8f2e-09ccbcfb3df5@kernel.dk>
 <ZThcATP9zOoxb4Ec@dread.disaster.area>
 <4ace2109-3d05-4ca0-b582-f7b8db88a0ca@kernel.dk>
 <20231025153135.kfnldzle3rglmfvp@awork3.anarazel.de>
 <b5578447-81f6-4207-b83d-812da7c981a5@kernel.dk>
 <20231025161405.eroaskwdauj57wz6@awork3.anarazel.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231025161405.eroaskwdauj57wz6@awork3.anarazel.de>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On 2023-10-25 09:14:05 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-10-25 09:36:01 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On 10/25/23 9:31 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 2023-10-24 18:34:05 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > >> Yeah I'm going to do a revert of the io_uring side, which effectively
> > >> disables it. Then a revised series can be done, and when done, we could
> > >> bring it back.
> > >
> > > I'm queueing a test to confirm that the revert actually fixes things.
> > > Is there still benefit in testing your other patch in addition
> > > upstream?
> >
> > Don't think there's much point to testing the quick hack, I believe it
> > should work. So testing the most recent revert is useful, though I also
> > fully expect that to work.
>
> I'll leave it running for a few hours, just to be sure.

Quite a few hours and > 15TBW written later, no hang....

Greetings,

Andres Freund